The Sun.
London, England, 1865-07-14 00:00:00

ELECT

GENCE.

BUCKINGHAMSHIRE.

The nomination of the candidates to represent
this county took place yesterday in the County
Hall, Aylesbury, which was densely thronged. A
considerable number of ladies were present in the
gallery. The High Sheriff, Mr. Nathaniel Grace
Lambert, presided.
Mr. Drake proposed, and Mr. T. T. Bernard
seconded, Mr. Caledon George Du. Pre as a fit and
proper person to represent that county in Parha-
ment.

Major C. M. Chester proposed, and Mr. Trumper
seconded the Right Hon. Benjamin Disraeli.
Mr. A. J. Robarts and Mr. E. Wanklyn pro-
posed Mr. Robert Bateson Harvey.
The High Sheriff then declared, amidst loud
cheering, that the following gentlemen had been
elected; Mr. Caledon George Du Pre, the Right
Hon. Benjamin Disraeli, and Mr. Robert Bateson

Harvey.
Mr. DISRAELI, on coming forward to address the
electors, was very enthusiastically received. He
said—Electors of the county of Buckingham, it is
some time since we met. On the last occasion, six
years ago, I took the opportunity of making a few
observations on the state of public affairs. lam
not disinclined at present to follow the same course,
but I am entirely in your hands. One is not always
in the humour for a speech, and if you don't wish to
hear the observations which I am prepared to make
you have only to tell me so. I can assure you my
feelings won't be hurt—(a laugh)--for I cannot sup-
pose you are at alltimes inclined to takethose grave
views of matters which are requisite when we speak
of public affairs. (Cheers, and cries of "Go on.")
When addressing you I remember that I am ad-
dressing a constituency whom I have always held
and believe not to be like every constituency. The
people of Buckinghamshire have some political
knowledge—there are political traditions in the
county—you have had something to do with politics,
and I feel that in speaking to my constituents I am
addressing men of good sense, and with a capacity
for forming an opinion on public affairs. (Cheers.)
I take it for granted, from the expression of your
sentiments, you don't think it unreasonable that
your representative, who has taken some part in
public affairs since he met you six years ago, should
make some observations with respect to political
matters on an occasion like the present. Now, when
you assembled here six years ago the political situa-
tion was rather critical. For several years the So-
vereign of this country had been counselled by the
most experienced and veteran of statesmen con-
tinually to recommend to Parliament schemes of
Parliamentary Reform. Lord J. Russell, Lord Aber-
deen, and Lord Palmerston--men most eminent and
most experienced in public affairs—had each in his
turn advised the Sovereign to recommend from the
throne that Parliament should direct its attention
to its own reconstruction. But you know that in
spite of these repeated declarations on the part of
the Crown, and of repeated appeals made in Par-
liament and out of it, nothing was done. Year after
year elapsed and nothing was done ; and the sub-
ject of Parliamentary Reform, which the Sove-
reign, under the advice of most experienced
counsellers, had repeatedly announced to the coun-
try, lay in abeyance. Under these circumstances,
a change of Government having occurred, Lord
Derby was sent for by her Majesty to form a Go-
verment. On that occasion, in 1858,. Lord Derby
was disinclined to take office, because, as he told the
Sovereign—and I had permission at the time to
mention these things, or, of course, 1 should not have
done so—the Crown and Parliament were placed in
so perplexing a position with regard to Parliamen-
tary Reform that it was impossible for any Mini-
ster to assume the reins of government and not deal
with the question. Lord Derby did not want to in-
terfere with the question then. He had been one of
the Ministers by whom the Reform Bill of 1832 was
carried—indeed, it was mainly through his ability
and eloquence it was carried—and though he was
not blind to the defects of the measure, and
knew that many persons in the country were
still without votes who might be safely in-
trusted with the franchise,he thought it was not ex-
pedient to interfere with the arrangement of 1832
without very considerable cause for such interference.
Believing, therefore, that it was not expedient to
interfere with the question of Parliamentaryßeform,
but being of opinion at the same time that in con-
sequence of the advice given to the Sovereign by
experienced Ministers it was impossible, with a due
regard to the dignity of the Crown and of the Go-
vernment, to leave the question untouched, he de-
clined to take. office. (Hear, hear.) But what
happened ? None of his eminent opponents in
public life would accept the responsibility, and her
Majesty was obliged to send for Lord Derby again.
It was impossible for him under the circumstances--
it. would have been unworthy of one in his
high . position in the Legislature and in the
country—to decline to enter the service of
the Crown ; but entering the service of the
Crown, it was necessary that he should pro-
pose to deal with the long-pending question of
Parliamentary Reform in a manner which, without
interfering with those institutions in which I be-
lieve the majority of the country are interested, at
the same time would terminate the embarrassing

position in which the Crown and the Parliament c;,

Great Britain were placed by the previous conduce

of Ministers. You know what took place. Lord
Derby did not accept the task without the under-
standing that, although none of his rivals would
pledge themselves to support his measure—for that
would have been unreasonabkh—his measure should
have a candid and fair reception. You know what
took place. It got no reception whatever. It was
not allowed to go into committee ; an abstract re-
solution, which was carried by the comparatively
small majority of 35, prevented the Bill from being
considered. When Lord Derby took office his
Government was in a minority of 140, I think, in
the House of Commons. The fact, therefore, that
when the division-was taken on the merits of that
Bill the majority against Lord Derby had shrunk
down to 35 is one which tells somewhat in favour
of the measure. (Cheers.) It is not necessary for
me to say anything further on the question; but
this I may remark—and the circumstance is one
which must have attracted your attention—that in
the speeches made by candidates throughout the
country during the present elections there is an al-

most universal expression of feeling on both sides
that the success of the opposition to that measure

of Lord Derby was, on the part of the Liberal
party, a very great mistake. It has been so spoken
of by many distinguished members of the Liberal
party. (Hear, hear.) I may say here—and I
have no viish to misrepresent anything—for, hav-
ing been honoured with a renewal of your confi-
dence, I should be sorry to use any expression
not dictated by a desire to place the state of public
affairs accurately before you—l think I may say
that public opinion, after the opportunity which six
years have afforded for a cool and careful con-
sideration of the matter has declared most decidedly
in favour of the principle on which that measure was
founded. (Cheers.) It was a measure which would
have increased the constituencies of the country—it
was a measure which would have intrusted the suf-
frage to men who by their industry, integrity, and
would, other praiseworthy qualities I am sure, hake w_

proved themselves quite fitted for its exercise. It
was founded on a principle which is the principle of

the E nglish Constitution— that the suffrage is a privi-

lege and a trust. It was not founded on any principle
_ _

of the rights of man, but on a principle which is in
unison with the Constitution of this country ; and it

was a measure which, if carried, I believe would have

strengthened the garrison of the Constitution

(Hear, hear.) Now, it is highly important in great
questions of this kind that an opinion should be
formed by the people of this country. What is called
thequestion of Parliamentary Reform is the question
of the distribution of political power. These are ques-
tions on which the people of this country ought to
have opinions, and I think that one of the consolatory
consequences of the rejection of the bill of 1858 is
that it has given an opportunity, from repeated dis-
cussion, to the people of this country to ponder well
over this q uestion, and to arrive at a sound and definite
conclusion, so that if ever the subject comes before us
again, I think we shall be able to bring to its conside-
ration a more mature judgment than hitherto, per-