The Sun.
London, England, 1860-05-01 00:00:00

THE ROYAL PARKS.

Mr. ALCOCK asked the Chief Commissioner of Works
whether he would have any objection to allow a certain
umber of Thames watermen to have boats on the Serpen-
tine, and other waters in the royal parks, during the sum-
mer months ?
Mr. COWPER was understood to say that the Thames
watermen, to a certain number, would obtain permission to
have boats on the Serpentine and other parks if they applied
for it. The water on the Victoria Park was too shallow
for the purpose of boats being rased on it; and he
assured the honourable member that there was every desire
on the part of the department of the executive
which he represented to afford the public all the enjoyment
possible in respect to the parks.
GOVERNMENT MEASURES.
In reply to Sir S. NORTMCOTB,
Mr. LAING said that the Customs' Bill would be pro-
ceeded with this evening, but no other Government mea-
sure would be submitted to the house until to-morrow.
REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE BILL.
ADJOURNED DEBATE.

Mr. BENTINCK resumed the adjourned debate. The
hon member said that the Government Reform Bill was
founded on data which were most inaccurate, and that the
speech of the halt. member for Birmingham (Mr. Bright)
was unsound in principle and incorrect in fact. For in-
stance, as regarded Rochdale, he (Mr. Bentinck) had re-
ceived a letter from a gentleman intimately acquainted with
that borough, stating that the Government returns gave no
idea of what would be the effect of the Reform Bill in that
borough, The £lO rating there most inadequately de-
scribed the character of the class that would be enfran-
chised by the operation of the measure. The writer
further stated that the real increase of constituency in
Rochdale, instead of 17,040, as stated by the Government
returns, would be 3,480. (Hear, hear, from the Opposition
benches.) He contended that the inevitable tendency of
the bill would be to throw an overwhelming amount of po-
litical power into the hands of the lower class, who, from
the accident of their position, could not be considered
as the most eligible depositories of such vast political
influeace. (Heart hear.) The writer to whom he had
previously alluded had requested him to ask Mr. Bright
how it was that that hen. member had so much more confi-
dence in the working classes than the working classes had in
him (sir. Bright), and how it was that nearly all of those
emplbyed in manufactories were on strike in consequerua
of the reduction of their wages. (Hear, hear, and laugh
ter.) , He denied that the measure, viewed by either side w
the hottm could be considered as a great Reform Bill; bu
that, on-the contrary, it was abortive for good, though ii
might produce evil, Ile strongly complained of the prin-
ciple and provisions of the bill, that railways and
large towns were considered as the chief representatives of
the property of the country, whereas the rural
districts were entitled to that description. Having com-
mented at some further length on what he considered
the unconstitutional character of the measure, he concluded
by asserting that it resulted from the political necessities of
the noble lord (Lord J. Russell), and that it was framed in
a party spirit.
Mr. WA LTER wished, before there was a chance of the
house being counted out—(a laugh)—to vindicate himself
from the charge of having any ulterior views in supporting
this bill. He assured the house that he had none. He be-
lieved that the consequences of this bill, if it passed, would
very greatly disappoint the expectations both of those who
opposed and those who supported it. He could almost ap •
ply to it the words, of the-prophet of old—" Woe unto them,
for they cannot do good ; neither is it in. them to do evil."
As an independent member, acknowledging no political
leader, but depending on himself alone for his political guid •
ance, he hoped the house would bear with him while he
stated his views of the position of the country with respect
to this measure. One question must have already occurred
to everybody who had thought on this subject—is reform
necessary? He should say, certainly not on account of any
crying grievance which afflicted the working class as a class,
or could possibly be remedied by legislation on this subject.
(" Hear," from the Opposition.) There was a time when
those classes were exposed to great grievances, when they
had an undue share of taxation, and penal laws were ex-
tremely oppressive. At the time af the Reform Bill of 1832,
they were led to expect great material and social advant-
ages from the passing of that act. Those expectations bad
been in a great measure fulfilled, partly in consequence of
legislation, and partly from. causes with which' legislation
had had no connexion -whatever. But he would defy any
one at this moment to lay his hands on one single grievance
which afflicted the lower class as a clan. (Loud' cheers
from the Opposition.) The hon. member for Birmingharit'
had been engaged for a long period in endeavouring to,
persuade the lower classes that they paid an inordinate.
and unjust proportion of the taxation of the country ;' end-
in a speech delivered in December last he had challenged
those who doubted it to disprove the assertion that more

than'one-half the taxation of the country was paid by the
working classes. That question had been recently in-
vestigated ; and, in an article in the Edinburgh. Re.
view, it was proved by most accurate and careful calcu-

lationa that the working classes, in reality, bore a smaller

proportion of taxation than was paid by other classes. Of
direct taxes they paid nothing, of local 'taxes next to
thing, and of indirect taxes (absut £12,000,000) it had been,

proved, as clearly as such a thing could be proved, that they .j
contributed -about £24,000,000, or a pound a head of the
unrepresented daises.: In:reconsidering quertions of ttixa-•
tion, that house was always disposed, and, he trusted, always
would be, rather fo incline- the balance in favour of trae• •

working classes than-against them. But Mr. Bright and
these who held the same vicws. should remember thet.if

direct taxation were extended much fartherft nmst be ee

tended much lower; and tho- workingman would not thank
.26,..Bright for sending him the income tax collector, twice

a year to levy a sovereign from him in a lump ; he had
rather continue paying indirect taxes in the form in which
they now existed. (Hear.) They might take 99 out of every
100 of the working men, and it would be found that their
grievances amounted substantially to this—" A little less
work, a little more pay, and a glass of beer to drink your
honour's health." (Great cheering from the Opposition.)
Some thought that a large infusion of the working-class
element would improve the constitution of tl at house ; and
if they could obtain the services of superior men who had
risen from the ranks, or were connected with them, it might
improve that house as a representative body. But he was
quite sure that if they had a very largo infusion from the
ranks great loss of time would be the result. The house
would be called upon to settle questions of wages, to me -
diate between employers and employed, and to deal with
such questions as had been raised by the journeymen bakers
about nightwork. Those were questions which they all
knew could not be settled by legislation, and the discus-
sion of which would only waste time. What, then, were
the reasons for which reform was necessary ? The prin-
cipal ones were these : It was agreed on all hands that
it was time to remove some of those anomalies which
were confessed to exist in the distribution of seats
throughout the country. Most gentlemen on both sides
of the house agreed that some redistribution of seats was
necessary. They were all agreed that it was quite possible to
extend the franchise to a large section of the working classes
without injuring the constitution. Whether this should
be done by lowering the general standard of the franchise,
as proposed in this bill, or, as proposed in the bill of Mr.
Disraeli, to include the working classes by means of fancy
franchises, was a question rather of detail than of principle.
The object to be attained in each case was precisely the
same. A third and more important reason why reform was
wanted was, that expectations had been held out for a great
number of years that such a measure would be passed. It
was a dangerous thing to keep a piece of meat dangling
before a dog's nose, even if the animal were not hungry,
and it should require considerable efforts to poke him from
a state of somnolency. (Immense cheering from the Op-
position.) Equally dangerous was it to keep holding out
the bait of reform to the working classes, and continually
withdrawing it. (Renewed Opposition cheers.) Another
question was, whether, if reform were granted, this was a
fit season to grant it. A dissolution had been alluded to';
but it did not appear to him to follow, as a matter of course,
that a dissolution should immediately ensue on the passing
of this measure. On the contrary, he thought it would be
a very great crime if Government, merely for the sake of
collecting such additional intelligence as could be gained
from the votes of householders between £6 and £lO, should
dissolve Parliament for that. He saw no reason why the
present Parliament should not go on until some cause in the
;nature of things should arise to require its dissolution.
'The next question was, if reform were wanted, what was re-
form ? A question much more easily asked than answered.
Was it a pulling to pieces and a reconstructing of the whole
machine, or merely taking out the decayed parts and put-
ting in new? Mr. Wilson, the chairman of a meeting
at Manchester, had said that since the last Reform
Bill everything had progressed ; the political machine
was the only thing that had remained stationary. (Hear.)
The logic of the hon. gentleman was—because all this has
been done by this machinery, therefore pull it to pieces.
(Hear, hear.) .He was an owner of machinery of various
kinds, and if any one came to him and said, "It is very
true that up to a certain period your business went on indif-
ferently, but you have introduced new and greatly improved
Machinery, by which your business has been increased,
your fortune has been made, and you are going on swim-
mingly : but people out of doors think the time has come
when your machinery has been tinkered, and I advise you
to let me pull it to pieces, and introduce changes of which
no human being can tell the result"—(hear)—should he
not suspect that the person who gave him such advice had
some job of his own to promote f (Hear, hear.) Should he
not say, " It is very trite that all machinery is subject to wear
and tear, and that it requires occasionally to be overlooked
and overhauled, but the arguments you use for pulling it to
pieces are prima facie arguments for keeping it together,and
should rather lead me to be very cautious how I meddle
with an engine that works so well ?" (Hear, hear.) He was
not contending that there should be no improvement, and
that the political machine, like the mechanical and organised
living being, did not require to be maintained and restored.
Progress —or rather, change—was the condition of human
affairs, and he alone was the true statesman who could apply
the remedies which experience and time showed to be ne-
cessary to the existing state of things, with the certainty of
producing a future amount of good. (Hear, hear.) He
now came to the bill before the house. It was the child of
the noble lord's old age, and although it was said he viewed
it with fatherly, or even grandfatherly affection, it struck
him, from the way in which he treated• it, that he looked
upon it with inconceivable indifference. (Laughter.) The
principle of the bill appeared to be the representation of
minorities and the extension of the franchise. He quite
concurred in that part of the bill which gave a third mem-
ber to certain constituencies. The object was to accomplish
by that means the representation of minorities. A great
deal had been written and spoken on this subject. Any one
who had read the pamphlets of Mr. Mill and Mr. Hare on
this subject would see, that of all the impracticable and im-
possible schemes ever devised none contained so many
absurdities as this. Whatever abstract arguments might
be used in support of any such scheme, he believed that
any proposition which aimed at the representation of mino -
rities, except in a very indirect way, would not be adopted
or listened to in that house. lie believed the scheme of the
noble lord, which aimed at accomplishing this by indirect
means, was likely to be useful and beneficial in the present
state of things. With regard to the extension of the fran-
chise, he did not propose to discuss the mode in which rat-
ing was to be applied to the question of the franchise. As
far as he was concerned, it mattered very little whether
100,000 more or less were to be added to the constituent
body. lie believed it would make no practical difference
whatever. In his opinion, the real question to be determined
was the degree in which those classes whom they proposed
to enfranchise were fit by their intelligence, their position,
and their respectability for the privilege. (Opposition
cheers.) A good deal had been said about distrust of the
working classes. So far from entertaining any distrust or
alarm of the working classes, he declared he could not go to
bed in peace if he possessed any such feeling. (Hear, hear.)
But the lower classes in all ages aid countries were liable
in periods :of excitement to be misled and humbugged by
popular orators. If he wanted to apply another standard be
sides that of his own knowledge by which to judge on this
matter ho should turn to the leaders of the working classes
in that house. What was theestimate which the hon. mem-
ber for Birmingham, a distinguished member of that house
who could compliment Chancellors of the Exchequer—
(laughter)—and who was an acknowledged leader of the
people outside of the house, in those places where they
were accustomed to look for an expression of the opinions
of the working class, formed of the people? The hon-
ourable gentleman, as he told them the other night, was
a member of a sect of religion which was distinguished
for possessing the essence of Christianity, and therefore
;he hon. gentleman must not be supposed to have spoken
without a due sense of responsibility and angelic charity.
(Hear, hear, and laughter.) The portrait of the hon.
gentleman as painted by himself might be found in the last
❑umber of the National Review. (Laughter.) But be (Mr.
Walter) referred to the speech which he delivered in Man-
chester on the 11th February, at a meeting of the Lanca-
shire Reform Union. The hon. gentleman here quoted from
Bright's speech, in which he said that the French
treaty was received with great coldness by the classes from
whom the people's representatives were chosen, and that if
the treaty brought about such commercial intercourse be-
tween France and England as existed between England and
the United States, it would not be in the power of prime
ministers, foreign secretaries, or diplomatists, to produce
disunion or to bring about war between the two countries.
These classes complained of the treaty because it cut down
the tree in which the unclean birds were lodged. (Laughter.)
The hon. gentleman, it appeared, had been reading his
Virgil, and he compared those gentlemen to the obscene
harpies, who eat up the food which had been prepared for
,F,neas and his companions. (Laughter.) Ho would leave
those gentlemen to speak for themselves. But in a speech
which the hon. gentleman delivered in the present month
he went a great deal further, and made a charge which
ought hardly to be passed by in that house. (Hear.) The
hon. gentleman, after repeating the statement in his former
speech, said that the real objection to the treaty had been
concealed, namely that it would promote confidence and
peace between the two countries, and do away with that dis-
trust and jealousy which would lead to war and taxation, of
which the higher classes had all the patronage. (Hear.)
Was that a sentiment which any hon. gentleman would

cheer ? (Hear, hear.) Were the gentlemen who occupied
those benches to be told deliberately that they opposed this
treaty because they considered that the apostle of free
trade might have been over-reached to some extent—
(opposition cheers)—and outwitted by the apostle of an-
nexation—(cheers)—that they opposed this treaty because
they were opposed to the greatest blessing that could befall
mankind. (Hear, hear.) Were they to be told that they
• were actuated by some diabolical motives as that for the

' ry*beggarly pittance of.the patronage, of the taxes they
were opposed to peace, the greatest of all blessings ? (Hear,
' 'When the hon. gentleman entered that house he
clrOmed :to be a statesman, but the hon. gentleman could not
• plartho great statesman and the "gteat demagogue at once.
(Hear.) • •He should not trouble, the kOuhe by going into
the social views held by the hon. gentleman, nor with his
ideas about the tenure of land.. They knew he could hardly
tireathe inGlasgow because the land belonged to the gentry.
.(Hear, hear.) He did not, as he said before, distrust the
working. classes, but he distrusted' those who used such
language as he had quoted: (Hear.) He was as little of

an alarmist as any man living; he believed that property
lud life were not subject to alarrain a country where truth,
and honour prevailed; but he should rather
ALIO 'coder the government bf a seecmd-Cromweil than iticifer
a Government where such sentiments and opinions as those
of the hon. member fur Birmingham .PriVaileil. (Cheers.)
It was painful to him to be, obliyeA to speak in such 'a way
of an hon member of that .iI2IIMI .*ll9 tad- a seat in it
• fir so many years, and Who was so great, an adept in the
process of parliarsentarr,self-elefenoe.• • But he knew his

,
renmrk,s were just, and he believed they were not uncalled

- --
for on an occasion like that. • He hacj only one farther re-
mark to make. The motile' 16fd spoke feelingly the other
night of the period
_since the passing of -the first It eform

Bill, and he referred to the various measures of improve-
ment and amelioration which had taken place since then.
The noble lord enjoyed the singular happiness of living to
witness the growth, maturity, and success of that great
measure, but it could be hardly expected, in the course of
nature, that he could bear his testimony to the success of
the measure he was about to launch into the world. This
bill would affect, not the noble lord, but them and their pos-
terity; but the reputation of the noble lord was dear to
every member of that house. He therefore trusted that they
would do their best in committee so to mend and improve
the bill as to send it into the world in such a shape that it
would not be a disgrace but an honour to the noble lord—
not a curse but a blessing to the country.
Lord J. MANNERS said the noble lord had the other
night enumerated various beneficial measures which had
passed since the Reform Bill, and the noble lord would lead
the house to conclude that those measures had been a con-
sequence of the Reform Act. With quite as much justice
and logic he (Lord J. Manners) might attribute the destruc-
tion of West Indian property to the terrible rebellion in
India, the Russian war, the Chartist insurrection, and the
Irish mortality and exodus, to the measure of 1832. (Hear.)
But even if these beneficial effects followed from the Re-
form Act, IN hat was the conclusion which a man of good
sense would draw from the fact ? Was it not this ? In
Heaven's name, leave well alone. (Hear, hear.) With
regard to the present bill, it was evident from all that they
had heard, that no reliance could be placed on the figures
on which the noble lord based the borough franchise. The
noble lord said that the £8 occupation would add between
60,000 and 70,000 voters to the constituencies. But he was
not content with that. He went on to say that the £7 oc-
cupation would add 122,000, but he was not content with
that. He then came to the £6 franchise, which, be said,
would add 194,000 to the constituency, and that was the
addition which gave satisfaction to the noble lord. But no
sooner had the noble lord stated his opinion than the hon.
member for Birmingham said it would not add more than
162,000, whilst the Secretary of State for the Home Depart-
ment said it would only add 160,000. On the other hand,
the hon. member for Marylebone, who first gave them facts
and figures, said the £6 franchise would add 500,000 to the
constituency. Had any gentleman on the other side of the
house said that the figures suggested by the hon. and learned
member for Marylebone were incorrect or not ? Why the
whole question was perfectly at sea. (Hear, hear.) The
Government had been obliged by the force of argument to
consent to the appointment of a select committee in the
other House of Parliament, by which the figures would be
sifted ; and until they saw the report of that committee he
confessed it seemed to him most idle to rely upon these
figures. (Hear.) The noble lord in the course of his speech
gave indications that he thought the figures of the hon. and
learned member for Marylebone might not be so inaccurate
as his colleague stated them to be, for he (Lord J. Man-
ners) noticed with some surprise that the noble lord said
that whatever might be the case with regard to the larger
boroughs, at any rate in the boroughs where the population
was below 20,000 the £6 voters would not swamp the ex-
isting constituencies, but would maintain their character.
(Hear.) The member for ➢irmingham said that the small
boroughs would be merely an extension of the county re-
, presentation. But taking all boroughs with a population
under 20,000 they would find that the voters added by this
bill would net make any serious change in the existing con-
stituencies. He (Lord J. Manners) would take six of the
largest and six of the smallest boroughs, which he assumed
to be a very fair specimen of what would be the effect of the
bill of the noble lord. He would take first the borough of
Shrewsbury, whioh at present had a constituency of 1,404;
to that the noble lord proposed to add 834, but for reasons
assigned by so many hen. gentlemen he (Lord J. Manners)
thought it far more likely the addition made to that consti-
tuency would be 1,043. He would next take Colchester, a
borough which he had the honour to be intimately asso-
ciated with for some years. That borough had a constitu-
ency of 1,257; according to the noble lord 573 would be
added, but according to more probable calculations it would
be 716. King's Lynn had a constituency of 1,119 ; the
noble lord proposed to add 665 to it, but according to more
probable calculations the addition would be 831. White-
haven had a constituency of 571 ; the noble lord proposed
to add 474 ; according to mire probable calculations the
inerease would be 592, or more than the whole constituency
at present. (Hear, hear.) Kidderminster had a consti-
tuency of 487 ; according to the noble lord the addition
would be 1,173 ; according to more probable calculations it
would be 1,473. Canterbury had a constituency of 1,564 ;
the noble lord proposed to add 482 ; according to more
probable calculations the addition would be 615. He would
then take the six smallest boroughs. Totness had a con-
stituency of 341; the noble lord proposed to add 47, but the
addition would be more probably 59. He would make a
present then of Totness to the noble lord, for he believed
Totness would remain the same Whig fief that it was at
present. (Hear.) The next borough was Lyme Regis,
which had a constituency of 265 ; the noble lord proposed
to add 139, but more probably it would be 174. Ashburton
had a constituency of 193 ; the noble lord proposed to add
71, but it would be more probably 89. Honiton had 287 ;
the noble lord proposed to add 46, but it would more pro-
bably be 58 ; and Arundel had a constituency of 196, to
which the noble lord proposed to add 80, but it would
more probably be 100. Take whatever figures they pleased,
assume the noble lord to be right—assume the Home Secre-
tary to be right—assume the member for Birmingham or
the member for Marylebone to be right—he (Lord J.
Manners) asked the house, was there not a preliminary
question which ought to be settled before they went into
those figures in a way that would perplex and puzzle them,
and that question was, what were the evils and defects of
the present system, and what were the remedies fit and
applicable for their removal ? Was it alleged that under
the present system the populations of the various cities and
boroughs had not their sentiments and opinions fairly repre-
sented in that house ? They had not heard any such allega-
tion. Take, for example, the great populations of the Tower
Hamlets and Liverpool, would any one assert that the mem.
bors for those places did not adequately represent the pre •
willing opinions and views of those important constituen-
cies ? The complaint against the present system was this ;
not that it did not adequately and justly give a fair repre-
sentation of the preponderating opinions of the constituen-
cies, but that when they came low down in the scale of the
present constituency there they found the poor voter liable
to corrupting influences, and their committees and commis-
sions had made revelations of so startling a nature that
they had become a scandal which ought by all means to be
put an end to as speedily as possible. But then, he asked,
was this bill of the noble lord calculated to diminish
the influence of bribery and corruption among the lower
class of voters ? None whatever. On the contrary, its
effect would be to double, treble, and, in some instances,
quadruple the area upon which these corrupting influences
would be hereafter exercised. Allusion had been made to
the bill of last year. No one could deny that that bill, by
the various franchises which it proposed to confer, was in-
tended to bring within the pale of the constitution fresh
and healthy elemee is from the property, intelligence, and
industry of the country, which probably aye and would
have had a most beneficial effect in deterring the lower orders
of voters from being corrupted. as they were at present. But
the bill of the noble lord was entirely silent on this subject,
and he could not believe it was a correct exponent of the
mature views of the Government on this question. Well,
then, as the bill of last year /sought to raise the working
man to the level of the franchise, so the direct and only
effect of the bill of the noble lord was to lower the franchise
to the level of bribery and corruption. He (Lord J. Man•
ners) had no fear of the use which the working classes might
make of whatever franchise Parliament in its wisdom might
think fit to confer on them. Probably the first question in
a parliament of working men, or in a parliament represent-
ing the views and wishes of working men, would not be a
question of political change, but a question which came
home to their hearts and interests, and which lay deeply at
the root of the question of the connexion between the em-
ployer and the employed. He did not wish to dwell upon
this subject, but as the hon. member for Birmingham had
made allusion to it at various meetings in the country—
Where he,
" Like Cato, gave his little senate laws,
And sat attentive to his own applause ;"

a laugh)—and given the working classes advice upon it.
He (Lord J. Manners) would take that opportunity of also
offering them some advice on the subject. The member for
Birmingham had said in effect to the working men, " You
have at present a most important organisation in your clubs
and trades' unions ; but believe me nothing can be more
foolish than the objects to which you apply that organisa-
tion. Trust me with. the direction of your trades' unions
and organisation, and see what wonderful effects I will pro-
duce for you." Now he (Lord J. Manners) believed the
working classes had not yet taken the advice of the hon.
member for Birmingham ; and he thought the reason was
this—the working men of the north were too shrewd, and
knew what they were about on this question. They knew
the conduct and career of the hon. member in that house,,
and when he came before the working men they naturally
said to him, " We have watched your past career in Par-
liament You were in Parliament in 1846 and 1847, when
a great question was raised to which we attached vast im-
portance; and how did you act when that measure was
under discussion ?" (Hear, hear.) The working men looked
to the records of the house, and they saw that the hon. mem-
ber for Birmingham was one of the foremost and most per-
tinacious opponents of the Ten Hours Bill to which they
attached so much importance, and which was defeated by a
very narrow majority. They remarked that in 1847, when
that bill was again brought in, the hon. member not only
spoke with great animation against it but acted as one of the
tellers in a small minority on the second reading of that bill.
But within the last month or so there was introduced a
supplement to that Ten Hours Bill, a measure for relieving
the sufferings of the bleachers, which attracted the sympathy
and secured the support of the great body of the working
classes.' What was the conduct of the hon. gentleman on
that. occasion'? True it was that he was in the House of Com-
mons five minutes before the bill came on, but not having
the courage to vote against the second reading he absented
himself from the division. He (Lord J. Manners) could
net, therefore, wonder ,that the working men of the north

did not place confidence in the hon. member, and refused to
follow his insidious and pernicious advice. He came, then,
to the second portion of the noble lord's bill, that which pro-
posed to cut down the county franchise to £lO. What there

the evils of the present system, and what were the remedies

which the noble lord proposed for them ? His (Lord John

Manners's) proposition was, that the bill of last session did
meet the only evil which the county representation ever had
alleged against it; but the bill of the noble lord removed
and intended to remove nothing. (Hear, hear.) The noble
lord in introducing his bill gave them no statistics in favour
of this portion of the measure ; but he told them that the
occupiers of £2O and £lO holdings were as fully entitled to
a vote as the owner of a £5O holding. Well, now he must
tell the noble lord that that was not a principle of the bill
of the late Government. There were two evils in the re-
presentation which the late government attempted to re-
medy. In counties it was found that the freeholders in
towns were likely to overwhelm the natural voice of the
purely county constituencies, and so trench upon the rights
and privileges of the rural districts, and they therefore pro-
vided that these freeholders should no longer have votes for
the counties, but for the boroughs. But a prejudice was im-
mediately raised by thenoble lord against that portionof the
bill, though that principle was one which in 1832 was sup-
ported by Lord Fitzwilliam, and many other stanch reformers
of that day. Was it contended that the county representation
at present did not give them the predominant voice of the rural
districts? It was admitted that it did; and it was not
alleged that there was anything like bribery and cor-
ruption in counties ; and except on the platform in Bir-
mingham, or in Manchester, no one alleged intimidation.
The other evil, he should rather say the other defect, which
the late Government endeavoured to remedy was this—that
a person living in a £lO house in a borough could exercise
the franchise, but if he lived beyond the boundary of the
borough, though he might have a £4O house, he had no vote.
' Their bill cured that defect. But the bill of the noble lord
merely transferred the defect from £5O down to £lO in
counties, and from £lO to £6 in boroughs. In principle the
defect remained, only the noble lord tinkered a little at the
upper end of the scale. On account of the wear and tear
of public life, and the grinding of the parliamentary mill,
there was a growing indisposition on the part of city gentle-
men to take that part in public affairs which they had
hitherto taken, and he did not think it wise to produce that
state of things, but the bill of the noble lord would have
that result. This brought him to the third portion of the
bill, and that was the redistribution of seats. He had the
greatest dislike to the proposition for giving a third mem-
ber to various towns and counties, but if they were to have
three members for certain constituencies, he should like to
know on what principle the noble lord proceeded. Was it
population? If, so, why was the Tower Hamlets, which had
the largest population of any borough, to continue to have
only two members ? The noble lord said it was diversity of
interests. On that ground the Tower Hamlets, he thought
had been hardly used, and was justified in asking for an in-
crease of members. These were some of the principal sins of
commission of this luckless bill. Its sins of omission were
without munber. He might occupy hours in recountin g thorn.
Let them draw a veil over them. He confessed, when he
heard the noble lord propose this measure, and witnessed the
mournful silence with which an unenraptured audience
listened to the dreary catalogue of stale proposals that fell
from his unimpassioned lips, he asked—Was this the great
measure of parliamentary reform, the deliberate proposition
of a Cabinet that arrogated to itself all the intellect, all the
liberalism, nay all the enlightened conservatism of the day ;
or was it rather the grudging and perfunctory redemption of
a rash pledge ? And then, when they came to the second
reading, net a minister spoke, and the defence of it was en-
trusted to the hon. member for Birmingham, who had been
the guardian and the champion of her Majesty's Ministers.
To him they owed the commercial treaty, about which
every one of their chambers of commerce were now so ecsta-
tic and eulogistic. He was of opinion that the time had
come when the gangway should no longer separate the hon.
member from the Government benches, and that, as he had
the responsibility, he should has e the honour of supporting
the Government. (Hear, hear.) Well, this being the cha-
racter of the bill, and the character of the support which it
had met with in that house, the practical question was,
what were they to do with it ? Tho house was something in
the position of Pickwick and his friends when they found
,-ilsemselves walking about the country with the unpleasant
tall horse, which they did not know how to get rid of.
There was, indeed, an hon. gentleman, the chairman of
committees, who discharged the functions of his office in a
way which rendered him most popular, who told them he
had found a loose box inwhich this tall horse might be shut
up, and the whole party at once felt a sense of relief which
could hardly be described. The noble lord, however, did
not wish his favourite quadruped to be disposed of in that
manner, and the hon. gentleman, who he thought was hardly
treated, at once withdrew his amendment. The qnestion
again recurred, what were they to do with this bill ? In
that magnificent speech which rendered the debate of last
Thursday memorable, his right hon. friend the member for
Hertfordshire appealed in the most patriotic terms to the
noble lord to withdraw the bill, but the noble lord did not
seem prepared to adopt that sensible advice. If the noble
lord insisted on proceeding with the bill in committee, it
would require all resources of mind and of body to pass the
bill through committee. Then he asked what was the posi-
tion of the noble lord ? Was he at that moment capable
however willing, to devote his energies, and that time, that
constant and assiduous attention which were required to
manipulate this bill into shape. The noble lord was conduct-
ing the affairs of this country at a time when the condition
of Europe was most critical. The noble lord had many
friends, and long might he he spared to thorn. When any
one was in conversation with any of these friends and any
one remarked that the noble lord had not penetrated the
designs of the Emperor of the French, though members of
the house had pointed them out to him, the reply was,
"Don't be unjust, the noble lord was overcoming the scru-
ples of his colleagues, and was devising a measure which is
to send him down to posterity as the great reformer of the
age." But if on the other hand it was said that this bill
was hardly such a bill as was expected from the noble lord,
the admiring friend said, "Don't be unjust to the noble
lord ; how can you expect he should be occupying his at-
tention with figures relating to £6 and £8 borough fran-
chises when he had on his hands the whole affairs of Europe
when he had to penetrate the designs of ambitious monarchs
and to restrain the fury of undisciplined peoples ?" He did
not like to give to the house that well-known description of
the noble lord by a facetious canon, but without saying that
the noble lord thought himself capable of performing an
operation for the stone, and commanding the channel fleet,
at the same time he might say that that was hardly a meta-
phor, for the noble lord Ras now cutting and slashing at
the constitution of England, and at tke same time he was
directing, not the channel fleet, but all the fleets of England
all over the world, for that was one of the important func-
tions of the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. Well,
then, they had the noble lord involved in duties which no
man could efficiently discharge. No livims man
could reform the constitution of this country and guide the
foreign affairs of this mighty empire in the present critical
condition of Europe at one and the same time. He trusted
the noble lord would make his selection, and either give up
the seals of the Foreign-oflice or give up his bill. For his
own part, he would rather the noble lord kept the seals of
the Foreign-office—not because he had the highest opinion
of the noble lord's conduct of that department, but because
he doubted whether the noble lord's thoroughly English
sentimen's were shared by his colleagues. But if the noble
lord were determined to take neither the one course nor the
other, it was clear to him, and he thought it must be so to
many members of that house, that they must expect some
signal failure in their foreign policy, and a miserable abortion
in the shape of a reform bill. He believed the country
would not blame the noble lord or her Majesty's Govern-
ment for withdrawing the bill. He was certain that on
that (the opposition) side of the house, no taunt and no in-
sinuation would be hurled against the motives which guided
the noble lord. It would be the patriotic course, and from
that side of the house the noble lord was safe from all re-
proach. Would the country blame the Government ? The
country was not apathetic, nor was it eager, as the hon.
member for Birmingham appeared to think it. The coun-
try was anxious and nervous, lest through ignorance,
through want of consideration, through prejudice, through
party feeling, an ill-considered measure should pass, and
bring ruin upon those institutions which had so long recon-
ciled liberty with order, and blended in one harmonious
whole the various classes of an ancient and illustrious com-
munity. Let the house view with respect these just and noble
apprehensions, and let not the strange and anomalous spec-
tacle be soon of a reluctant Parliament forcing upon a still
more reluctant nation legislation so devoid of merit and so
full of danger to its constitution. (Cheers.)
Mr. lIODGKINSON said that many of the topics dealt
with by the noble lord who had just sat down had nothing
whatever to do with the measure under discussion. It was
said to be dangerous to entrust the working classes with
the franchise, and the late combination of working men in
the building trade against the masters were alluded to,
but except on that subject, in which all their personal inte-
rests were involved, could they be got to combine for poli-
tical, religious, or any other objects whatever ? He thought
not The building strike was a very different thing from
any other matter, and for political objects he had no fear of
the working classes. But it was said the house waspledged
to Reform, and, upon the other hand, there was an apathy
about Reform out of doors. There were two opposite ar-

gutnents used by one and the same speaker. Looking at
the opinions of the house generally, the two great parties
seemed to differ mostly upon the point of the reduction of
the borough franchise and the fancy franchises. Was
not the Conseivatiye measure rejected mostly upon the
ground that the borough franchise was not reduced ? Did
they not go to the country on that point, and did not
Lord Derby admit that the country was against him on
that point ? He also admitted that Parliament was

against his Government on that point, and that, therefore,
they were prepared to deal with the borough franchise by
lowering the suffrage. lie hoped they would speedily pass
into committee on the bill.

iMr. lIOPWOOD believed the noble lord the Secretary
of State for Foreign Affairs was one of the most overrated

statesman of the present day, and it was to be hoped he was
not the author of the present measure. It was a most ob-
structive bill, and fell far short of the just expectations of
the people.

Mr. CAIRD supported the bill. He did not think it con-
tained any provision which would upset the balance of the

constitution. Taking the present number of houses and the
number of voters, he found that the figures gave one voter
for every four householders. The Home Secretary, who was
naturally best informed as to the actual addition to the con-
stituency, if the bill was passed, estimated the increase at

, MAY 1, IE6O.

400,000, which would still leave the proportion of one voter
is three. householders. That certainly could not be called
a household suffrage; while in Scotland and Ireland the
voters would still be far below one-third of the adult male
population of those parts of the United Kingdom. Even if I
the additien was entirely from the working classes there
would be no danger from that, poking at the general spread
of intelligence among them ; and further,, so far from their
being a monotony of pursuits, he found, by a careful return
from the city of Edinburgh, that among the 4,000 who
would be added to the constituency by the bill, there
were 170 different pursuits—(hear)—and that they belonged
to the same classes and professions as the present constitu-
ency. As to the admission of the working classes of this
country, he saw no danger to be apprehended from it, but
on the contrary many advantages, and he should therefore
cordially support the second reading. •(Cheers.)
Mr. B. COCHRANE said the measure now before them
was one that was covered with obloquy, and that was treated
with the greatest amount of obloquy—a bill of which
no man spoke out of doors but in terms of
obloquy. (Hear, hear.) There was one most important
point upon which they must all agree, namely, that the
bill was not to be considered as a final settlement of the
question, but as an instalment only—(hear, hear)—and if it
could be asserted that the measure would have the effect of
.settling the question even for twenty years, he, for one,
would say, "Let us agree to the bill." (No, no, from the
Opposition) It was a dangerous measure, and he might
illustrate it by reference to one of £sop's Fables. A wood-
man went into the wood, and appealing to the trees asked
them to give him a handle for his hatchet. They all agreed
to furnish him with a handle; but so soon as the handle was
fitted to the hatchet he went to work, and was cutting down
every tree in the forest. There was among them an aged
oak, who whispered to another, " We have done that which
will be the ruin of us all." (Laughter.) Now, so it was with
the Reform Bill. If they consented to it it would be the
ruin of the country. Her Majesty's Ministers reminded
him of Puff, in the Critic, who, when he had put his actors
on the stage, each with a dagger in his hand, exclaimed,
"There is a situation but how ant Ito get them off ?"
(laughter)—and so it was with respect to the Reform Bill.
With respect to the working classes, he begged to say lie
had no apprehension of those of this country; bat he cer-
tainly entertained great dread of the enormous control which
some parties exercised over them. The views, for instance,
of the hon. member for Birmingham (Mr. Bright) had been
overlooked in that house. (Oh, oh, and laughter.) The
hon. member's opinions as expressed in the house were cer-
tainly understood; but they were of a very different cha-
racter when he delivered them out of the house. The hon
member reminded him by his speeches of what was said of
the month of March—that it "came in like a lion, and
went out like a lamb." The hon. member in that house
certainly came in like a lamb, but when he left it he went
out like a lion. (Laughter.) He would read •a collection
of the hon. member's speeches as published and corrected
by himself. They were delivered by him at Birmingham,
Manchester, Leeds, Bury, and other places. Here, for
instance, was one of them :—" How can I reconcile a free
representation of the people in the House of Commons
with the inevitable disposition of an hereditary House of
Lords ? Now, they consequently knew from those expres-
sions that the hon. gentleman was of opinion that they
could have no free representation of the people with a here-
ditary peerage, and without the abolition of the House of
Lords.

Mr. BRIGHT—Are those words in the speech ?
Mr. B. COCHRANE—Yes.
Mr. BRIGHT—The hon. gentleman is not quoting cor-
rectly. He is interlarding. lam very sorry to interrupt;
but he has introduced and added words that are not in the
speech.

Mr, B. COCHRANE—I will read again. [The hon.
gentleman here read the extract again.] Now, according
to those opinions of the hon. gentleman no great question
of parliamentary reform could be obtained without the abo-
lition of the House of Peers. (No, no.)
Mr. B. COCHRANE—I will quote again from the hon.
gentleman's speech.
Mr. BRIGHT—Read it all. (Laughter.)
Mr. B. COCHRANE—I should be very sorry to mis-
quote the hon. gentleman ; but the hon. gentleman said
this—" There is another kind of influence which I am
afraid to touch upon—that creature ! What shall I say of
the monstrous, nay, adulterous presence in the House of
Lords, of the spiritual peers. Mr. Kinglake, in a very in-
teresting work which he had written of his travels in the
East, describes the jackalls, is hunting their prey, just like
place-hunters is England." (Hear, hear, from Mr. Bright,
and laughter.) " The great territorial families," continued
the hon. gentleman, " follow their prey just as the jackalls
follow their prey. (Hear, hear, from Mr. Bright.) Such
was the language in which the peers of this country were
spoken of by the hon. gentleman the member for Birming-
ham. This proposed Reform Bill would ultimately
affect the whole financial interest of the country, and
when they passed the measure they would have in
the new Parliament a financial system throwing the
whole taxation on the property of the country. Had an
opportunity been afforded him he should vote agains
the bill. They had been taunted because they declined tot
move an amendment. But he repeated his belief that if
every hon. member in that house gave his vote according
to his conscience, the measure would be rejected by a ma-
jority of two to one, and he believed that. when it was too
late they would find, if they passed the bill, that it was
fraught with evils to the constitution of the country.
Mr. P. URQUHART said the great objection that was
urged to this bill was directed specially against the exten-
sion of the franchise to the occupiers of £6 houses. But he
would ask whether it was not notorious that the members
of that class had universally improved both in intelligence
and in social status ? Even if that were not the case, he
fully believed that what was for the good of one class was
for the good of all other classes, and that any selfishness on
the part of one class towards another would re-act power-
fully upon it. A glance at colonial progress, and even at
what they saw in the United States, would supply an irre-
sistible argument in favour of reform, and he still hoped,
notwithstanding the spirit of opposition which it had ex-
cited, that the bill, which he must say he wished had gone
further, would receive fair consideration at the hands of
hon. gentlemen opposite, and eventually pass through both
houses. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. DU CANE said he had listened to the addresses
which had been delivered on both sides of the house on this
question, and he rose in a state of considerable mental be-
wilderment as to who were really the supporters of the bill
(Heat', hear.) The house would remember that at the
downfall of Lord Derby's Administration they were told
they were about to see some little clearness in the
Political atmosphere, and that an identity of sentiment
would pervade the hearts of 4he great Liberal party. He
had no doubt that at the time those words were spoken
those who uttered them were sincere; but looking at the
course which this debate had taken, he feared that, like
some exhibitions which they had lately witnessed in that
house of liberal cohesion, that identity of sentiment had
been of a somewhat short-lived character. The hon. mem-
ber for Birmingham supported the bill, because it was an
instalment and excluded any fancy franchise. On the
other hand, the member for Marylebone condemned the
measure for the self-same reason. The member for Bir-
mingham spoke with almost an amount of contempt and
indifference as regarded the limited number which this bill
would introduce to the franchise. On the other hand, the
member for Marylebone was in perfect raptures at the pro-
spect of the thousands—perhaps tens of thousands—whom
he hoped shortly to embrace as his new constituents. The
member for Edinburgh (Mr. Black) did not hesitate to de-
nounce this bill as a dangerous measure ; but, on the other
hand, the member for Tiverton (Mr. Denman) said he should
cordially support the bill, on the ground that, after the
measure of last year, he regarded it as a Conservative mea-
sure. But when he heard the same hon. member say that
he could not detect a:single argument in the speech of the
right hon. baronet the member for Hertfordshire (Sir E.
L. Bulwer) he questioned the soundness of his conserva-
tism. Then the Home Secretary recommended the bill to
their notice because he said it would do them no harm,
while the member for Salford thought it would do no good,
and other hon. members regarded it as a homoeopathic dose.
Ho (Mr. Du Cane) did not wish to introduce party ques-
tions into this debate, but he could not help asking what
benefit the house and the country had reaped by affirming
the resolution of the noble lord last year, and why some of
them at least were not sitting in the first session of a re-
formed Parliament? Let them examine the most
prominent 'features of the present bill. He should say in
the first place, he thought they had in the bill of last year
the materials ready at hand to reduce the county franchise
to £lO in any way they pleased, and they might have with-
out any great difficulty effected a reduction of the borough
franchise. Ho knew the then Government were opposed
to the resolution of the noble lord, because they said it was
brought forward at an unfair time, and raised an unfair
issue; but he thought there was no evidence to show that
if the house had gone into committee on that bill, and had
proposed the introduction of a £lO or a £6 franchise, that
Lord Derby's Government would not have accepted the
proposition. But even suppose they had not, the ho,use
would not now be in a worse position as regarded this ques •
tiou, because they might have had some direot expression
of the opinion of the house on the borough franchise. He
thought they might also have effected, by the bill of last
year, a redistribution of seats to a somewhat narrower limit
than the noble lord now intended to fix them. They had,
moreover, in the bill of last year, a franchise which would
have acted among the working classes upon the principle of
selection, which would have extended to thousands of artizans
who were entirely passed over by the present measure. (Hear,
hear.) That measure, as it now stood, would be, in his opi-
nion, the most dangerous and one •sided measure which had

ever yet been presented to the house ; and as regarded any
i m mediate purpose of a satisfactory settlement, the bill would
be both insignificant and abortive. It would unsettle every-
thing and settle nothing, and in its future consequences
_ _ _

would be both dangerous and revolutionary. If the house
wanted to pass a measure of reform, let it not be a taut-
_

sure framed merely for the sake of passing, but one
which would embrace those reforms which appeared to the
house • bo desirable. Upon. the question of registra-
tion, polling booths, and travelling expenses to voters, this
bill was silent as the grave. It had been thrown out that
they were to be treated to a supplementary reform
bill in that house when a certain committee, which ,

was sitting up stairs on corrupt practices at elections, had
finished their labours, and presented their report; but he
thought if that argument was good for anything at all it
was a conclusive one for the postponement of this measure
till the committee alluded to had furnished their report. He
wished here to make a remark on what had fallen from the
hon. and learned member for Marylebone. The hon. and
learned member retaliated on the discontented elector, who
complained that his vote was neutralised by the Liberals,
by saying that the Liberal electors might make the same
complaint of North Essex. If the hon. and learned member
took the troub:e to analyse the Conservative majority of
North Essex, he would find that it comprehended every
class, whereas the hon. and learned member himself was
returned exclusively by one class of his constituents. The
hon. and learned member had also expressed his rapture at
the number that would be added to the London constitu-
ency, but he had not told them how many members of the
late builders' strike would be numbered amongst the new
electors. The hon. and learned member for Tiverton had
said that if such a strike had taken place before the passing
of the first Reform Bill it would have terminated in blood
and riot; but he should remember that there were other
methods of coercion besides the brickbat and the bludgeon.
The hon. member for Bi, mingham was prepared to repose
a generous, confidence in the people, but they should begin
with having confidence in the hon. member himself, and
that confidence was diminishing on that (the Opposition)
side of the house as rapidly as it seemed to be increasing in
tho Treasury benches. They had been told by an illus-
trious member of that assembly that confidence was a
plant of a slow growth, and they had this year seen the
futility Or a great many golden proverbs. How different
from his language in that house was the hon. member for
Birmingham's language on that Manchester platform, when
his own chairman told him he drove such a roaring trade;
might not this house be apt to think that this would only
be a temporary gift of the franchise, and that it would pro-
vide for the subsequent power of combination. It might be
thought by hon. members that this would be but a drop in
the ocean of what the working classes had a right to expect.
(Hear, hear, from the Ministerialists, and cheers from the
Opposition.) The working classes would enter into new com-
binations,, and they would act upon their delegates in Par-
liament, and woe be to the man who did not obey the will
of the people. The hon. gentleman then read an article
which recently appeared in the Weekly Dispatch—the
organ of the working classes—showing what a tremendous
measure this Reform Bill was, and that it was far more com-
prehensive than either friends or enemies conceived. Hon.
members might think the writer's views exaggerated. But,
at any rate, this was not a branch of the question which
they could afford to pass over in silence or with indifference
at a moment when they were about to pass a bill which was
to be the prelude to further changes in the constitution, and
which would give to the working classes a preponderance in
the representation of the country. They lived under free in-
stitutions and in times of freedom of speech, and with a free
press. The principle of this measure was an extension of
the franchise, and it was no part of a Conservative policy to
deny that principle. It was no part of the Conservative
policy to imitate the example of another celebrated phalanx
of 300 in ancient days, who buckled on their armour and
courted destruction, in their hapless resistance to the ad-
vancing tide of popular opinion. Ho did not say to the
Conservative party, as regards the present position, in the
despairing language of Byron—
" Of the three hundred grant but three,
To make a new Thermopylae."
(Hear, hear.) The question involved was not one for
the Conservative party alone, but for every pasty, by what-
ever name it might be called, or who had any regard for
representative institutions. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. CLAY said he fancied that the middle classes had
had their Reform Bill in 1832, and that now the time of the
working classes had come. It was because the Conservative
measure did not concede that principle that they on that
side of the house voted against the bill. In his belief they
must have a Reform Bill, and the only question was, what
kind of Reform should 'it be. It was said this was the
wrong time, but he agreed with Jeremy Bentham, that as
soon as they found anythihg wrong, then was the time to
amend it. He declined to put off indefinitely this long agita-
tion of reform. His right hon. friend (Sir E. B. Lytton)
objected to this bill because it did not go the length
which reformers desired; but Radical members would not
object to the bill being extended to the intelligent classes
to a greater extent than was now proposed. He should be
happy to assist his right hon. friend (Sir E. B. Lytton) in
committee on the bill to extend its principle to the more in-
telligent classes of the community ; but he had no hope that
his right hon. friend would go this length.
Mr. A. MILLS said that up to that night there had
been 43 speeches made on this bill, of which only one was
positively in favour of it. The others were chiefly against
it. The party with which he was identified had no desire
to destroy the bill, but to make it, in committee, a really
efficient measure. He for one was most anxious to make it
such a bill, Mit if it did not come out of committee as good
as he could desire it to be, he for one would vote against its
third reading.
Mr. J. LOCKE was anxious to say a few words on this
question, as, with the exception of his hon. and learned
friend the member for Marylebone. not one metropolitan
member had spoken on the question. His hon. friend (Sir
C. Napier) and himself were returned by the working
classes, and it was said that the object of this bill was to ex-
tend the franchise to the working classes, and that there-
fore the object of this bill was a bad one, because it would
have the effect of returning to that house such members as
those who represented the metropolis in that assembly.
Well, all he could say was, that he wished all the members
of that house were as good as the members for the metro-
polis, (Hear, and a laugh.) The members for the metro-
polis amounted to 16 in number. Whatever talent might
be denied them, this, at least, could not be said of them,
that they were not assiduous in their duties towards their
constituents, or to the obligations imposed upon them as
members of that house. But if they looked amongst the
present members of the metropolis, it would be found that
they could boast, at least, of having as one of them the
noble lord the member for London. They could also boast
of having amongst them generals and admirals who had
fought for and defended their country. They had also
amongst them one who had solved a difficulty which had
occurred in the course of the Crimean war. That hon. mem-
ber had carried out a railway from Balaclava to the heights
of Sebastopol, and for making which ho was made a baronet.
(Hear.) These were the members who were returned by
the working classes. (He tr.) In.many of the metropoli-
tan boroughs not one-half of the electors ever voted at all ;
but it was not so in Southwark, for at last election, out of
10,000 electors en the register, upwards of 7,000 went to the
poll. He did net mean to say he approved entirely of this
bill, but he certainly did approve of the £6 franchise, and
regretted a lodger franchise was not introduced. There were
many persons who were in lodgings earned £5, £6, and in
some instances £8 a week, as engineers and others, and were
persons of great intelligence and respectability. (Hear.)
He did not care whether the addition to the franchise
made by this bill was 250,000 or 450,000, so long as ade-
quate arrangements were made for registration and for
polling. He hoped the bill would be allowed to go into
committee as soon as possible. The bill was certainly
without some of the franchises which were in the late bill,
but the late Government had all the clauses cut and dried—
(laughter)—and as the noble lord had said, the bill was
open to them if they could get their clauses into it.
(Hear, and laughter.) But did they really want these
clauses ? Did they want a Reform Bill at all ? (No, no.)
That was the question. He was glad to have extracted
from the party opposite such a candid expression of opinion,
but if they did not want reform, how came they to have in-
troduced a bill on the subject. (Hear.)
Mr. KENNETH MACAULAY moved the adjourn-
ment of the debate to this day.
Lord PALMERSTON consented to the motion, but
hoped that the two motions fixed for to-day would be post-
poned to make way for the adjourned debate.
Colonel DICKSON said Irish measures ought not to be
thus continuously postponed. He could not see why all
the-time should be devoted to English bills. (Hear, hear,
and laughter.)
Mr. VINCENT SCULLY said that forty-four English
members had previously spoken on the Reforin
Bill—
(laughter)—and fifteen more had spoken that night. (Re-
newed laughter.) Thus they had sixty English members
speaking on the Reform Bill, so that that measure had
become the great social evil of the day. (Laughter.) It
was becoming a standing nuisance both to the house and
to the country. (Hear, hear.) Ile noticed, too,
that every one wise spoke addressed himself not
to the Government, but to the honourable gentle-
man the member for Birmingham—(laughter)--who had
become a sort of dry-nurse to the noble lord. (Laughter
and cheers.) The noble lord had said he would not take
the second reading of the Irish Bill till after the second
reading of the English Bill, although the English Bill con-
cerned the Irish member as much as the Irish Bill. Out of
the 14 metropolitan members they were told that only one
had spoken; now two had spoken, and he should patiently
hear the othei 14—(laughter)—only he hoped that when
they had all exhausted their eloquence on the subject, Irish
members would be allowed to state their impressions, and
that no impatience would be exhibited towards them.
(Hear.) , He agreed with the reproach that members did
not take their proper part in general legislation, but con •
fined themselves too much to questions of merely local in-
terest. He hoped they would take the hint which had been
given them on this point, and if they'did not, he should be
compelled to allow his modesty to be overcome—(laughter)
—and state his views at some length. (Hear, hear, and
laughter.)

Mr. POPE HENESSEY said he could not withdraw
he important bill which stood in his name for to-morrow
:this day).

Sir J. ELPHINSTONB said he hoped the hon. and gal-
lant member for Southwark would not withdraw his motion,
since the manning of the navy was far more important an
any Reform Bill. (Opposition cheering.)

- -
Mr. P. O'BRIEN said the sooner the bill was disposed
of, one way or the other, either by being passed or thrown
out, the better. (Hear,hear.) If the Irish members gave
way on the tenant right question to-morrow, would the
Government give them another day for the purpose ?
(Cries of Question and Hear, hear.)
The debate was then adjourned to this day, and the Mai
and Scotch bills were also postponed,