The Express.
London, England, 1867-05-03 00:00:00

THE • EXPEESS, FRIDAY lATENING, MAY 3, 1867.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

Sir G. Gas complained that the house was not
fairly treated iu there being no explanation of the
bill, and said if he agreed to the second reading
now, he should reserve the right of making any
statement on the motion that the house go into
committee on the bilL
The bill was then read a second time.

HOUSE OF LORDS.—T_nuß‘nmr, MAY 2.

IN the House of LORDS yesterday, the Earl
of DERBY' in reply to Earl Russell, said renewed
exertions had been made by the neutral powers
to preserve peace, and the King of Holland
had been induced to propose a conference. That
conference was about to take place, and would meet
in London not later than Tuesday next. Tele-
graphic oommunications were going on between all
the parties, and although, as yet, no preliminary
basis had been agreed upon, he had no doubt that
a conclusion would be arrived at which would avert
all danger of war, and would satisfy the military
honour both of France and Prussia.

The Metropolis Gas Bill was read a second time
and committed pro forma, with a view to its being
reprinted and referred to a serect committee.
The Public Health (Scotland) Bill was read a
second time.

The Factory Acta Extension Bill and the Hours
of Labour Regulation Bill were referred to a select
committee.

The Local Government Supplemental Bill passed
through committee.

The Marquis Of CLANRICARDE postponed a
motion of which ho had given notice in reference
to the case of the Tornado.

Mr. HUNT obtained leave to bring in a bill to
allow warehoused British spirits to be bottled for
home consumption.
The home adjourned at nine o'clock.

The increase of the Episcopate Bill was read a
second time.

The Religious, &c., Building Sites Bill passed
through committee.
The house adjourned at 2 minutes after five
o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-THURSDAY, MAY 2.

IN the Horse Of COMMONS, Mr. BRIGHT gave
notice of his intention this evening to Cain the atten-
tion of the house to the course taken by the govern-
ment with regard to the proposed meeting in Hyde-
park, and
Mr. WAtrots gave notice of his intention this
evening to bring in a bill for the more effectually
securing certain royal parks and gardens for the
recreation of her Majesty's subjects.
In reply to Mr. W. E. FORSTER,
Mr. WAtrote stated that he intended to submit
to his colleagues a measure on the subject of the
licensing of public-huuses. . . .

The CHANCELLOR of the Exennoura in reply to
several questions from Mr. W. B. Forster, said the
proviso at the end of the 34th clause of the Re-
presentation of the People Bill, which enacts that
the rates to be paid by the occupier shall be cal-
culated on the full rateable value of the premises,
has no reference to the third section of the Com-
pound Householders Act, which enacts that the
occupier claiming to be rated shall not be bound
to pay or tender more than the amount of the rate
then payable under composition. He did not, he
said, wish to make the new franchises analogous
to the old franchisee. He thought the Compound
Householders Act a very bad act, and ho would
not be any party to the extension of its provisions.
Lord STANLEY appealed to Mr. Baillie Cochrane
to withdraw his motion, of which notice had been
given for this evening, in reference to the ship
Tornado, saying that negotiations were still pend-
ing, and that a debate might throw difficulties in
the way.
Mr. B. Coe-Havre accordingly postponed the
motion for three weeks.
The house then went into committee on the Re-
presentation of the People Bill, resuming at clause
3, which is the clause relating to the borough
franchise.

Earl GRORVZNOR, who had an amendment on the
paper to substitute a 5!. rating for household suf-
frage, said he believed that at one time that
franchise would have been accepted, but since
then a division had taken place which had resulted
••• in a victory for the government, and having
= consulted with other members, he believed it
would be useless now to propose that franchise.
He vindicated himself from the attacks made upon
= him by Mr. Osborne who had alleged that no one
was more against reform than he was, and he jus-
tified his vote against Mr. Gladstone's amendment
by saying that if it had been carried the govern-
- meat would have been overthrown, and the pro-
: veils of the bill stopped, and that his object was to
see a bill passed this session which would be satis-
- factory to the house. He also denied that there
was any collusion between him and the govern-
- ment.
The amendment was then withdrawn.

Mr. AYRTON moved an amendment to that part
of the clause which requires a residence of two
years. He moved that "twelve months" be sub-
stituted. Practically the provision of the bill
would require a residence of two years and four
months, which was longer than was required under
the Municipal Act.
Sir J. PALINGTON agreed that there was no
principle in this provision, but the government
could not adopt the amendment. They thought
they should not open the franchise to every emi-
gratory sojourner in a borough. He complained
of the language used by Mr. Bright at Birming-
ham, who said the government tried in every little
dirty way to exclude the people from the franchise.
The Municipal Act, which was brought in by a
liberal government, required a residence of two
years and eight months, and the Reform Bill of
1864, brought in by Earl Russell, required a resi-
dence of two years and six months. It was said
that the provision for the payment of rates gave
facilities for corrupt practices, but surely those
facilities would be decreased by requiring a resi-
dence of two years instead of one. It must be re-
membered that the government were making con-
cessions.

Sir It. PALMER asked if this restriction was the
price of the concessions the government were
making. He rejoiced that they had given up the
bard and fast line, but if they gave it up they
must give it ualtogether. They must make the
conditions of the franchise the same for those they
were about to admit as for those who were already
admitted to it. If two years were a proper time,
why not apply it to a ten pound householder?
Mr. Bess thought that unless they required a
residence of two years from the ten pounder, it was
impossible to require it from other voters. He
complained of the hard words that had been ap-
plied to him by Mr. Bright and others. He thought
these hard words ought not to be applied to men
who had followed the fortunes of the liberal party
for twenty years. He had not deserted Mr. Glad-
stone, but had acted on his instruction and advice,
for he told them that they must have a bill this
session. Instead of his having deserted his party
he thought his party had deserted him.
Mr. BRIGHT expressed his sorrow that the cap
that he made was so suitable to Mr. Base that he
had put it on; but, in fact, he was not in his mind
when he made the observations in question, and
with regard to the words quoted by Sir John
Pakington, he begged leave to tell him that they
expressed the oi of the 5,000 or 6,000 persons
to whom he addressed them. With regard to the
provision requiring a two years' residence, it was
simply a restriction which was founded on no
qualification or disqualification. It would apply
with great severity and injustice to the now voters,
and give great dissatisfaction. The restriction was
not proposed in order to improve the quality of the
constituency, but to restrict the numbers.
The Soticiroa-Gzszitet replied in detail to the
objections which had been urged against the clause,
and observed that the arguments of Mr. Bright,
if valid, would be good against residence being
requirei at all.
Mr. Daniel./ expressed his belief that the pass-
ing of the clause in its present shape would be the
signal for the commencement of an agitation for
the abolition of the restriction. Government were
playing the cards of the liberals in supporting this
clause.

The committee then divided, and the question
that the words in the clause stand part of the bill
was negatived by 278 to 197.
The CHANCELLOR of EXCHEQUER then stated that
after the decision which the committee had arrived
at it was not within his power, without consulting
with his colleagues, to proceed with the bill, and
he therefore moved that the chairman report pro-
gress.

The motion was put, and several members cried
"No," and there appearing to be a disposition to
negative it,
Mr. GLsofiroiss said the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer having declared that the matter required
the consideration of himself and his colleagues, it
was quite impossible for the house to go on with
the bill.

The motion was then agreed to, and the house
resumed.

The CHANCELLOR, of the EXCHZQUIS moved the
second reading of the Corrupt Practices Bill.