The Sun.
London, England, 1870-05-19 00:00:00

PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS BILL.

The Daily Hews refers to the Parliamentary Elections
Bill just printed, and says that if the measure passes as
it stands it will effect a great improvement in our elec-
toral system. But the House of Commons will, we
trust, give it a form which will enlarge its range and effi-
ciency. It is open, in its present shape, to many criti-
cisms. It is something less than a Parliamentary Elec-
tions Bill, and it is at once something more and also
something less than a Ballot Bill. As a Ballot Bill the
measure is incomplete, for it does not extend secrecy of
voting to the municipalities. Mr. Candlish has already put
an amendment on the notice-paper for supplying this omis-
sion. Without implying that the municipalities are
vilia corpora suited for political experiment, yet there
will be some advantage in allowing the working of the
Ballot to be tried on them year after year, before a new
general election. The defects of the particular system
which may be adopted, the evasions to which it is open,
and the means of remedying those evasions, will thus be
disclosed. It is true that a Municipal Elections Bill is
promised next year ; but" next year," like Macbeth's to-
morrow, is a shifting period; and there is no use in de-
ferring to the future what can be done now. The parti-
cular form of the Ballot chosen by the Government
will naturally give rise to discussion. Will a measure
which allows, under certain conditions, the iden-
tification of a voter's balloting ticket, give not only secu-
rity, but what is quite as important, the feeling of secu-
rity? Sir Charles Dilke had an amendment upon Mr.
Leatham's Bill, providing for the destruction of the
Ballot tickets after the election. It is of course equally.
applicable to the Government Bill. We are inclined to
think that this proposal takes unnecessary precaution
against a very remote danger. But it may be well to
have the subject thoroughly discussed. The second read-
ing of the Parliamentary Elections Bill is fixed for the
30th of this month. Between this time and that, and the
still remoter day of going into Committee, both the
Government and private members will have ample oppor-
tunity of considering and reconsidering their position.

THE PACENT OUTRAGE AT CHRIST CHURCH.—
The unfortunate affair at Christ Church will, it is under-
stood, entirely put a stop to the Christ Church ball, which
has hitherto formed one of the most attractive items in
the programme of commemorative festivities at Oxford.
It is understood that a warrant has been issued against
the gentlemen who so mysteriously left Oxford on Sun-
day night, but up to the present time it has proved in-
gibytuid.

SKETCHES IN PARLIAMENT.
WEDNESDAY.

Now that we are half way through May the interest
in parliamentary proceedings has become very much
diminished, and although under the rule of our "earnest"
Premier holidays are forbidden, the House is several
times in the course of an evening in such a state that it
might be counted out. As for the Peers' Gallery, it was
left last night for a considerable time to one solitary
Westminster Scholar, the Speaker's Gallery had
but ten occupants, and even the Strangers', which
has occupants though it is only a road bill that
is being discussed—even this gallery was but half full. On
the opposite side the Press Gallery had, indeed, its usual
staff of reporters, but the " able editors " were as few as
coroneted carriages in Pentonville. Can you wonder at
it? Read the " questions "in last night's list. There
was the old annual about Hamilton-place, that sacred
street which all the Queen's horses and all the Queen's
men cannot get through, which not even an Act of Parlia-
ment can open, though it is a case of all London against
six "swells." Some years ago the matter might have
excited some interest; but we have long since submitted
to our fate; we acknowledge ourselves beaten by Mr.
Wentworth Beaumont and his neighbours, and it is only
when poetic vengeance comes upon them in the shape of
a great jewel robbery, that we are for a moment aroused
from despairing apathy. That certainly was not amatter to
draw a large attendance last night, either of M.P.'s or
strangers. Akin to this was Mr. Denison's question as
to whether cabs would be permitted within the sacred
enclosure between the Marble Arch and Apsley
House. There was deep design in that ques-
tion, however. Mr. Denison meant to force
Mr. Ayrton into cutting through Hamilton-place
by turning hansoms and growlers into Hyde Park. This
was a horrible suggestion, so horrible that Mr. Denison
thought it would frighten our most popular of YEdiles into
doing something decisive. M.P.'s would seem to have
been taking their walks abroad, for after the questions about
Hamilton-place and Hyde Park came one about that great
triumph of British art, the Guards Memorial in Waterloo-
Place. Profane contractors have been piling up road-
stones on the base thereof, and all the vast and complex
machinery of Parliament was set in motion last night by •
Lord Claud Hamilton, in order to remedy this great and
shameful wrong. Sir Henry Hoare made use of the same
illustrious organisation to put Kensington Gardens in
order. Sir John Hay, who ought to have been a canon
so fond is he of great guns, had a question about Sir
Joseph Whitworth's piece. There were some other ques-
tions of a different class, but is it not a terrible waste
of time that the first representative assembly in
the world should be compelled to pacify hon. members,
whose anger is excited by a heap of road-stones ?
Drowsy as this catechism was, it was liveliness itself
compared with the debate which followed. Sir William
Payne Gallwey--bald-headed, grey-moustached—M. P.
for the populous city of Thirsk, who makes one speech in
each Parliament, delivered himself last night of,an oration
about the Folkestone and Boulogne and Calais and Dover
packets. He began at five ; he went on for more than
three-quarters of an hour, one word in every two
seconds. The Westminster Scholar could not stand
it, and fled. It was a welcome relief when
Mr. Shaw Lefevre got up and rattled off his
reply in true official style. The Channel steamers
not being Government vessels, the Secretary to the Board
of Trade did not feel himself under any obligation to de-
fend them. Still he was a trifle more eulogistic than he
would have been hadhe been actually suffering the horrors
of the middle passage. However, he gave us hope of im-
provement before long, and, after speaking for twelve
minutes, sat down with an appeal to the venerable
baronet not to go to a division. Probably Sir William
Gallwey never meant to do so ; for, no one seconding
his motion, he would have found the right hand lobby
rather a forlorn place. However if he could not divide he
could make a second speech, which was listened to or
rather not listened to by a gossiping house. At last there
was a cheer, the first which the Yorkshire baronet had
excited. What was the good thing he had said ? That he
would say no more.
The next notice of motion was one by Mr. M'Cullagh
Torrens, praying the Queen to provide passages to
colonies for emigrants at cheap and uniform rates of charge.
But there's sometimes a slip 'twixt the cup and the lip, and
it was so on this occasion. Torrens is not a common
name, but there are two M.P.'s who own it, and both sit
on the same side of the House, and both take a great
interest in the colonies and emigration. Now it so hap-
pened that when Mr. R. Torrens, the M.P. for Cambridge
borough, two and a half months ago brought forward a
similar motion, which was negatived ; this fact was not
forgotten by the watchful Speaker. He has quite long
hours enough, and so have Ministers, and he had no in-
tention of allowing a violation of the rule which prohibits
a motion to be made similar in substance to one already
moved in the same session. Of this he
gave Mr. McCullagh Torrens due notice, and so instead of
making his speech the M.P. for Finsbury was compelled
to explain that he would not be able to make it, where-
upon up jumped Mr. Macfie to move the amendment
which he had put upon the notice paper. He was received
with shouts of laughter and cries of order—almost the
first sign of life for the evening. The mover
of the amendment was thus as badly off as the
member for Finsbury. Both had intended to " orate,"
both were picked up short. The laughter subsided; the
Speaker, vis pietate gratis, rose, expounded the House of
Commons law on the point, and then called upon Mr.
Graves. Now Mr. Graves is a great commercial autho-
rity, and he had an important subject, the want of a
commercial member in the Council of State for India.
He spoke well (barring an excess of quotations),
and he was not too long, in facthe occupied
less than half the time taken by Sir William
Gallwey; and at twenty minutes to seven Mr. Crawford,
M.P. for the city, as great a commercial magnate on the
Liberal as Mr. (raves is on the Conservative benches,
rose to speak on the motion. Judgi',2; from his statements,
it certainly is not the fault of the vernment that com-
mercial men are not on the C0n:1,,1. They have been
asked and they have refused; a case of nolo episcopari in
fact. When Mr. Crawford had finished Mr. Eastwick
had the parole. Mr. Eastwick understands Eastern
affairs if any one does, and his remarks were fre-
quently applauded. In fact he is one of those new
members who have gained the ear of the House, and to
whom the House is always ready to listen. Not that he
is an orator. He simply talks in a conversational manner,
but he always talks well, and understands what he is talk-
ing about, a quality which the House values a good deal
more than eloquence. While he spoke the Treasury
bench was occupied by Mr. Gladstone (asleep I fancy),
Mr. Ayrton who used to make India a specialit4, and
Mr. Grant Duff, who ought to have been Under-Secretary
for Foreign Affairs, but who nevertheless is not doing
badly at the India Office. The Marquis of Lorne entered
the House while Mr. Eastwick was speaking, for the
young nobleman naturally takes some interest in the de-
partment over which his father presides. The other mem-
hers who took part in this debate may be divided into
three classes : there were the members representing great
critics, and as such largely interested in the trade of
India, viz., Sir Thomas Bazley, Mr. Muntz, and Mr.
Graham, representing Manchester, Birmingham, and
Glasgow, as Mr. Graves had represented Liverpool ;
there was Sir Charles Wingfield, who like Mr.
Eastwick has a special acquaintance with India; and there
were members of the Government—Mr. Grant Duff and
Mr. Gladstone. Fortunately for the House the Premier
has learnt to tame that once most unruly member—Mr.
Ayrton's tongue—by putting its owner into office, and so,
though the First Commissioner of Works was one of the
few Ministers who listened to the debate; and though,
previously to December, 1868, he would have given us an
hour's speech on the subject, he refrained, and after a
debate of two and a half hours, in which the unanimity
of the speakers was wonderful, the motion was with-
drawn, and nothing came of it, as is apt to happen when
everybody is agreed.
The purging effect of an Indian debate upon the House
of Commons has been proverbial from the days of Macau-
lay downwards. Your readers will therefore not be sur-
prised to learn that by eight o'clock the House was very
thin. This is the witching hour of dinner, and the •
benches are at this period of the evening
always in a rather forlorn state. Yesterday
there were other reasons why they should have
been more than usually empty ; the occur-,
rence of an Indian Debate as already mentioned,
and the fact that Mr. Fawcett had a motion coming
on. Mr. Fawcett is a very clever man, but I am bound
to say he is not a favourite. Conservatives look upon him
as a second edition of Mr. Mill, thorough-
going Ministerialists think him a pragmatic
doctrinaire, and if the Professor were to hear the remarks
made upon him by those shrewd and generally impartial
critics, the occupants of the Press gallery whenever he
rises to speak, Ido not think he would be pleased. Let
it be understood that I am passing no judgment upon
him. I am simply recording the fact that he is not
popular either downstairs or upstairs, and I do so
simply to explain the catastrophe which happened last
night. I said at the commencement of this sketch
that our " earnest " Premier does not allow us the luxury
of count-outs. There is no rule without an exception,
and that exception happened yesterday. Soon after the
Professor had risen, a member (one of those who are said
to do good deed by stealth and blush to find it fame)
stole up to the Speaker and suggested that there were not
forty members present. The Speaker went through the
usual preparations for counting heads, and. Mr. Glyn
aid not think it necessary to use his• whip.
Sir. Disraeli put his professor into a book, and thereby
inflicted condign punishment upon Mr. Goldwin Smith
(I think that by a slip of the pen I said Professor Rogers
on a former occasion). Mr. Gladstone . punished his by
allowing him to be counted out. This is only the second
count-out of the session, and on each occasion Mr.
Fawcett Ups keen the victim of it. Scarcely an undesigned
CtintiOnA 4in giinking*