The Express.
London, England, 1867-06-18 00:00:00

4-

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS. —IIIoN vex, Jt Ns 17.

In the Howls of LORDS yesterday, the royal
assent was given by commission to the Consolidated
Fund (14,001MWSW.) Rill, the Exchequer Bonds
(1,700,0001.) Bill, the Public Works Loan Bill, the
Salo and Purchase of Shares Bill, the Labouring
Claws Dwellings Act (1866) Amendment Bill,
the British Spirits Bill, and a number of private

Earl Russzia. gave notice that he will, on Thurs-
day next, call attention to the trusty recently con-
cluded in reference to Luxemburg.
The Earl of Snarriasuxv gave notice of his in-
tention to move on Friday for a committee to am-
■ider if arrangements can be made for the house to
meet in future for the despatch of business at four
or Lilt-peat four o'clock.
Thu County Courts Act Amendment Bill passed
through committee.
The Public Libraries (Scotland) Acta Amend-
ment Bill and the Chester Courts Bill were read a
third time and passed.
The house adjourned at six o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-MONDAY, JUNE 17.

Ix the Sousa of COMMONS, Mr. J. GoLaamta
gave notice of his intention to move the rejection
of the amendment in the 15th clause of the Repro-
sentition of the People Bill, of which notice has
been given by the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
to combine the Universities of London and Durban;
into one constituency.
'rue Gliantuittou of the EXCHEQUER, in reply to
a question from Mr. Stacpoole as to when it is
proposed to introduce the Irish Reform Bill, stated
that there was no doubt that from external agencies
acting on the population, there was in Ireland a
general feeling of distrust and a great sense of
danger. It was difficult to deal with questions in-
volving electoral rights among a people thus cir-
cumstanced, and therefore the government had
determined to postpone until a further opportunity
dealing with that question.
Sir .1. PARINOTON stated, in reply to Mr. W. E.
Forster, that in case of volunteers acting for sup-
previing and quelling riots, as contemplated by the
instructions lately issued by the War Department,
their officers would have no legal power or control
over them, and that under the exceptional circum-
'tutees contemplated in the instructions ho pre-
sumed the volunteers would use any arms within
their reach.

The Cussroma.on of the EXCHEQUZIL, in reply
to various questions, stated that the schedules to
the Representation of the People Bill were merely
temporary, and would only be acted upon in the
event of contingencies which it was almost impos-
sible could arise. The boundary commissioners
would have power to do anything but one, and
that was to d' • ' h the existing boundaries of
boroughs. He had intended to have laid on the
table a clause to define the powers of the boundary
commissioners, but on reflection this appeared to
the government to be premature, because if Mr.
Laing's motion were carried it would be conaiiered
by the government as decisive of the merits of
their general scheme, and they would have to con-
sider their position generally as regarded the bill
altogether.
The house then went into committee on the
Representation of the People Bill, resuming the
discussion at clause 10, and _ . .

Mr. Lame moved an amendment, giving an ad-
ditional member, making three members each, to
the following towns—Birmingham, Bristol, Leeds,
Liverpool, Manchester, and Sheffield. There were
three other large cities with a population of more
than 150,000—Edinburgh, Glasgow, and Dublin.
The government had already proposed to give a
third member to Glasgow ; and Dublin, not being
in England, could not be dealt with by this bill ;
but if this amendment were carried, Dublin would
no doubt be dealt with in the same manner, and
the proposition, therefore, involved eight seats.
These six cities comprised a population altogether
of 1,644,000 persons, while bix boroughs which the
house had refused to disfranchise contained a popu-
lation of only 20,728 persons. He had already
stated that the precise number of 25 seats which
the government had taken to increase the county
representation was not more than the counties
were fairly entitled to, and he therefore did not
propose to take these seats from the counties, but
he proposed to obtain them by grouping the
smaller boroughs.
Mr. BAINICri seconded the amendment.

Mr. BRIGHT said in 1832 Birmingham had a
population of 143,000, which had now increased to
345,000, and the people of Birmingham, therefore,
considered they were fairly entitled to additional
representation.
Mr. NZWDEOATI should vote for +he amendment,
believing that by so doing they would relieve the
large towns from the evils of democracy.
Mr. Humans moved an amendment upon the
amendment enabling each elector entitled to three
votes to give all his votes to any one candidate, or
to distribute them among any two or more candi-
dates, but
The CHAIRMAN ruled that he was not in order.

Mr. ROZDUCK, however, Sir W. HEsrucora, and
several other members questioned his decision, and
a discussion arose thereupon, which was ended by
Mr. Hughes withdrawing his amendment.
Mr. JANZA said there had been no petition from
Manchester, nor had he received any intimation
from his constituents in that city, to have such a
benefit conferred upon them, and he therefore felt
at liberty to follow his own bent, which was to vote
against the amendment.

Mr. BATLEY said it was true, as his colleague
had stated, that no petition had come up from
Manchester for more representatives, but he had
received a remonstrance from Manchester for not
having proposed six additional members for
that city.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
question had been asked why the government pro-
posed to give additional representatives to coun-
ties and nut to large boroughs. The reason was
that the population of the counties exceeded the
population of the boroughs, and they had proposed
to give the counties additional members in order
to find a counterbalaw.e. As he stated last year,
out of the 334 nembirs 84 might fairly be con-
sidered as indirectly representing the county in-
terest, and if they aided them to the 162 county
members they had a total of 246 members repre-
senting the county interests, against 250 represent-
ing boroughs. What had they done thus far to
disturb this arrangement 1 They had taken away
45 seats from boroughs, and of those 34 were
part of the 84 which were considered as represent-
ing the landed interest. It was, therefore, but
right to give the additional members which he had
proposed to the counties.
Mr. GLADSTONE, referring to a statement of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer in an earlier part of
the evening that if this motion were carried the
government would have to consider their position
in reference to the bill, observed that the bill
was not the property of the government, but of
the house. It appeared to him that there was
an irrefragable claim in policy and principle on the
part of these large towns for more representation.
Me reminded the house that last year they rejected
a bill giving but a moderate extension of the fran-
chise, and this year had to give a much larger
franchise, and he warned them that if they
rejected this very moderate proposal they would
probably have to agree to a much wider plan of
redistribution.

Lord CRANBORNZ said if this motion were re-
jected it would preclude them from adopting the
amendment for cumulative voting. He was in
favour of giving votes to minorities. If he could
not have that he should like to have Mr. Cobden 's
scheme for dividing the constituencies and giving
one member to each. Ile supported the motion
because experience showed that, where there were
three members, there were generally two on one
side and one on the other.
Qn, a division the motion was rejected by 247
toft.

Mr. LAING thereupon withdrew the remainder
of the amendment giving two members instead of
one to certain other boroughs.
Mr. A. MrrciiaLL moved an amendment that every
borough which returns two or more members shall