The Sun.
London, England, 1865-06-09 00:00:00

TIIE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, JUNE 9, 1865.

After some further discussion the clause was agreed to ;
as were also'clanses 6,7, and 8.
On clause 9 being proposed,

Sir F. KELLY asked for information as to its real mean-
ing and object. In particular he wanted to know whether
it meant that any pension granted after the passing of the
act might be stopped at the will of any future Government
which could command a majority in the house.
The AT TORNBY-GENERAL said the pension would
be just on the same footing as all other pensions granted
under the authority of the House of Commons. Of course
the faith of Parliament would be pledged to the payment
of the pensions.

Sir F. KELLY said, as clause 9 now stood, it might
happen that, if the Government for the time being omitted
to ask the house to vote a particular pension, the party
entitled to it might be deprived of that reward for his ser-
vices. He should therefore move the omission of the clause.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL replied that the hon. and
learned member was mistaken as to the effect of the clause,
for if the Government neglected to do its duty it would be
always in the power of the house to rectify the omission,
and adopt an address to the Crown.

After a few words from Mr. CORRY and Mr. CHILDERS,
the committee divided.
The numbers were—
For the clause
Against
Majority —27
The clause was then ordered to stand part of the bill.

Clause 10 was withdrawn, to be considered on the re-
port.
On clause 11,

Sir J. HAY moved the omission of certain words in the
clause, with the view of retaining the office of Master and
Governor of Greenwich Hospital, as it was the prize which
was most coveted by distinguished officers of the navy ;
and the commission strongly recommended that the office
should be retained.

Lord C. PAGET thought it would be hardly just towards
the other officers if the office of Governor were retained,
The object of the bill was to do away with all sinecures in
the hospital ; and the Government thought the better
course would be to grant nine or ten pensions.
After some further discussion,
The committee divided—
For the amendment

Against it 57
Majority —4
The clause was then agreed to.

Sir J. D. HAY said that, as the committeewas so evenly
balanced in opinion, he should on the report again take the
sense of the house on the question.
Clauses 12 and 13 were agreed to.
The Chairman was ordered to report progress, and the
house resumed.

The report of supply was brought up and agreed to ; as
was also the report of the Inland Revenue Acts.

The Defence Act (1860) Amendment Bill passed through
committee.

The Militia Ballot Suspension and the Militia Pay Bills
were read a third time and passed.
The house then adjourne .!

ELECTION INTELLIGENCE.

FINSBURY.

It is currently rumoured that the Conservatives
contemplate bringing forward a candidate for the
representation of this borough at the approaching
general election, the temptation being the division
at present prevailing among the Liberals. To the
three candidates who have for some time past been
seeking the support of the electors for the seat to
be vacated by Sir Morton Peto, ,Mr. M'Cullagh
Torrens, Mr. Alderman Lusk, and Mr. W. Phillips,
a fourth has been added in the person of Mr. Parfitt,
a lecturer to a body called the " Religious Re-
formers." This candidate will contest the bOrough
in thelPermissive Bill interest, and it is understood
that he will receive the support of the teetotallers.
The supporters of Mr. W. Cox, the sitting member,
held a meeting on Wednesday evening at the Sports-
man Tavern, City-road, and it was resolved to take
energetic steps to secure the return of Mr." Cox on
the purity principle, adopted at the last election,
when large bodies of the electors made a strenuous
effort to bring voters to the poll at little expense to
the candidate.

and bringing in impracticable ones, aimed at miti-
gating a burden he could not remove, and had car-
ried through a measure, every principle of which
Mr. M'Laren himself had personally supported.
Coming to the question of Parliamentary Reform,
he said—l am accused of having broken my pledges
on this subject. I never gave any pledges upon it,
and I have always refused to pledge myself to any-
thing. I have repeatedly stated my views upon
this subject. The franchise is not a right but a trust,
and a machine for the production of good govern-
ment. (A Voice—You're a Tory. Another—
You're an impostor.) That machine may get out
of gear, may require repair or strengthening ; and
the best machine is that which makes the best work.
The mere lowering of the franchise is not improving
it ; if it were so, then lowering it to £6 would be a
reform, but lowering it to £5 or £3 would be a
greater reform still ; but by doing this without some
counterbalancing weight you destroy the equilibrium
of the machinery. I have always refused to give a
pledge, but I recollect when I first appeared before
this constituency, when I was asked if Iwould pledge
myself to one, not to vote for universal suffrage, or
anything that would lead to it, being convinced that
Baines' bill and every bill that, under the pretence
of Reform, proposes to lower the franchise as a
right, and admit a large number of one class, leads
inevitably to universal suffrage. I should have vio-
lated the only pledge I ever gave had I supported
that bill. (Uproar.) Mr. Baines in the whole of
his arguments rested the claim of the £6 householder
on their rights. I oppose Mr. M‘Laren because I
believe he would join the extreme party, and give his
influence and the influence of this city to the down-
ward and dangerous movement. (Uproar, and a
Voice—Why not ?) It is said that I did recommend
the £6 franchise. At one time I did. But what was
the state of the question at that time. Mr. Disraeli
had produced the Conservative Bill, Lord J. Rus-
sell his bill, and the ultra-Liberals were going still
further down the scale, and as the lowering seemed
inevitable, as the safest course I said I would re-
commend the £6 franchise—as I would to a re-
treating army to take up the safest position they
could find in their retreat ; but not long after the
country was roused by the dangerous strikes and
alarming organisations among the working men,
and after hearing the Government Bill discussed
for several days, and giving it the most serious con-
sideration, I came to the conclusion that it was dan-
gerous, and ought not to pass. (Cheering, hissing,
and hooting.) It has been said I oppose all Reform.
So far from that I would reform every abuse ; and
I am prepared to support an extension of the suf-
frage which would embrace the more intelligent of
the working classes, but not in such numbers as
would swamp the others, and counterbalanced by
an addition of other classes, such as lodgers and
small proprietors, and some of the fancy franchises
which were so ridiculed in the bill of Mr. Disraeli,
so as to keep our Parliamentary system 'properly
balanced. (Cheers and uproar.) I have always
voted for Mr. Locke King's motion to extend the
suffrage to householders in the counties as in the
boroughs, as here you have a sound principle to go
by ; and there is no liberal motion of that kind
which I have not supported. During a long life I
have done and suffered much to promote the rational
liberty of the country. As I opposed the threaten-
ings of power, I will not bow at the shrine of popu-
larity. (Hooting and loud cheers.) If the electors
of Edinburgh. chose Mr. M'Laren and Mr. Miller as
their representatives, they hasten the downward
progress of this country towards democracy. I offer
myself as your representative to do what little I can
to prevent what I look upon as a dire calamity, and
though I am now old and should greatly have pre-
ferred rest, I am willing to sacrifice ease and com-
fort for what I consider a public duty, and I trust
no one will say now, " We would have voted for
Mr. Black, but we think he desires rest and deserves
rest, and we will rather do him a service by voting
against him." All such apologies I shall look upon
as hypocritical. (Loud cheers.)
The LORD-ADVOCATE, who was received with
cheering and opposition, said—l have always met
with a kind reception from the electors of Edinburgh,
but I have not one-half the claim on the respectful
attention of a meeting of the constituency of Edin-
burgh that is possessed by my hon. friend on my
right hand, who, during a life extending beyond this
century, has maintained with firmness, with distinc-
tion, and with honour, the principles of the Liberal
party. I have nothing to say against anybody op-
posing my hon. friend and myself. I see that Mr.
M'Laren and Mr. Miller have started on strictly
Liberal principles—and indeed, to my astonishment,
because I rather think it is the first time that he
(Mr. Miller) has appeared absolutely in that charac-
ter. (Hear, and laughter.) There has been a great
deal said about Mr. Black's opinions on Reform,
and I have been asked why it is that, seeing that I
differ from Mr. Black on these subjects, I have
started along with him, and have made common
cause with him. I differ from Mr. Black. I do not
agree with him in regard to his views on the exten-
sion of the suffrage, but I know him, notwithstand-
ing, to be a Liberal to the backbone. Six years ago
you had a Parliament elected for Reform. You had
a Government—or rather, I might say, two rival
cabinets, that were each pledged to Reform. Reform
was in the mouth of every one on the hustings, and
Reform predges were vowed at every election
throughout the country. Where are all these pledges
now ? What has become of them ? Lord Derby's
Government went out, and Lord Palmerston's Go-
vernment came in, and they brought in a Reform
Bill ; but, alas ! the lethargy, apathy, and silence of
the country were so great that there was not a leaf
of popular applause stirring. Some people have at-
tacked Mr. Black for not supporting the bill ; but
where was the constituency ? how did they do their
part ? Where were the petitions that should
have loaded the table of the House of
Commons in favour of Lord Palmerston's
Reform Bill ; and still more of Mr. Baines's
Bill ? Why do you say to your representatives,
You have betrayed our cause," when you never
thought it worth your while to say one word in sup-
port of these bills ? (Cheers and hooting.) 1 am
myself of opinion that an extension of the franchise
would be a safe and salutary measure, but the
question is one more of detail and fact than a ques-
tion of principle. On the one hand, you have men
who want rather to make political capital out of it
than merely to extend the suffrage for the sake of
the excluded classes—men hunting about for a grie-
vance not to be found, and whistling for a breeze—
(hisses)—which shows no inclination to rise. On
the other hand, you have men—men for whom I
entertain a great respect, such as Lord Elcho, Mr.
Lowe, and my hon. friend Mr. Black—who seem
rather to conclude that because there is no agitation
and excitement there is nothing that deserves the
attention of the Legislature, and nothing that calls
for Reform. Well, now we are told—and this is a
view I want to put—that this is a democratic move-
ment, and that we want to Americanise our institu-
tions. Mr. Lowe, in that very able speech of his
the other day, showed very clearly how impossible it
would be, even if you transplanted American insti-
tutions in this country, to transplant American re-
sults along with them. The effect of the first Reform
Bill has not been Democratic. On the contrary, all
the great institutions. of the country are certainly
quite as safe as they were —I should say a great
deal safer—than they were before it. The Lord
Advocate then referred to the local annuity tax,
which he said he had reduced from 10d. to 4id.
Those who paid, he said, had the benefit of a reduc-
tion of nearly 6d. per pound, and those who resisted
payment could surely resist payment of 44d.
quite as easily as 10d. (Loud laughter.) He
believed that in five years, if the present
prosperity of Edinburgh continued, the tax,
already so greatly reduced, would vanish
away. He concluded by saying—To repre-
sent my native city in - Parliament I have
always considered the proudest honour con-
ferred upon me. I shall welcome it if restored to
my hands, and I hope I have done no disgrace to it.
If you shall reject me, I shall bow with regret but
with respect to your decision, while I shall ever re-
member with gratitude the honour which you have
conferred upon me. (The Lord Advocate sat down
amid cheering, mingled with groans and hisses.)
After some unimportant questions, Mr. Sheriff
Davidson, seconded by Mr. James Cowan, moved

that Mr. Black and Mr. Moncrieff, Lord Advo-
cate, were fit and proper persons to represent the
city in Parliament ; and the Lord Provost put the
motion, which was responded to by the great ma-
jority of the meeting, and declared to be carried.
A vote of thanks to the Lord Provost, proposed by
the hon. candidates, closed the proceedings.