The Sun.
London, England, 1860-04-24 00:00:00

. .
#-" ,e
-I‘t‘
4 crra
•
(ac 11114.1115114 .2 .
• • k\
• 0' • irediffer 4 ;4--ervr -
, •,
~
13. • , • -'715. • CV-
• ir,413:4A
. „ 0, .
,
,
•
. tr,l, nn+
'i1..7),
. • 1L,,,,.);!,„1,, 4•t
,L, ...HT.••

t T; -D.
S TI

„,;:.:,z,w4z..tit,AAp,.--
~.„,_,, y-V.
43,885. (Hear.) The total estimated a ittA "ii 0.-- 14°. ki., '--i.1.,1
-11 le
1. ' -,-- 7.-„7-.-, v-,
the metropolitan constituencies—Finsb if-es,. :el le cfraj
Westminster, Lambeth, Southwark, an G
13,992; but the number of rated £6 housese(Lleefutfinese2-47..
.....
per cent., the deduction made by the Government fori in- S
sufficient residence, female tenancy, and the like) was no
leas than 109,900. (Loud cheers and counter cheers.) But
he did not stop at the metropolitan boroughs. He had '
caused inquiries to be made in a g: eat number of other
towns with similar results. For instance, the Government
calculated that the addition of voters at Blackburn would
be 1,100, but the town clerk estimated it at 3,796. At
Macclesfield it was considered that there would be 2,700
more new voters than was stated by the Government ; at
Blackburn 2,074 more, and at Ashton nearly 2,000 more.
His correspondent at this last town, who was a strong sup-
porter of the right hon. gentleman (Mr. M. Gibson), said
that if the Government had asked for a proper return—viz.,
a return of the number of £6 houses—they would hare ob-
tained information that might have been depended upon,
but, as it Iva*, their return was nothing but "a series of
the grossest blunders.” (Laughter and cheers.) Under the
30th section of the Refo oe Act the occupier of a house,
the rates for which were paid by his landlord, had nothing
to do but to tender his rates, and he could claim a right to
rote, for doing which considerable facilities were afforded
by the act of Sir W. Clay. It had, more )ver, been legally
decided that if a landlord charg I in his rent anything for
rates, even if it were Only a shilling, that payment would
insure to give the tenant a qualification ; for as the Reform
Act did not say anything about the rates being paid by the
hand of the tenant, the landlo: 1 was treated as his agent.
(Hear, hear.) He (the hon. and learned member) now
came to the re-adjustment of the constituencies. The
Government had not had courage to deal with this
question as a grad question ought to be dealt with. In his
opinion, if public opinion did not back them enough, they
had better wait till it did, rather than pass a bill which un-
settled a great deal and settled nothing. The public had
certainly expected a more satisfactory measure from the
noble lord, who might be called the parent of parliamentary
reform, and who had taken so great a part in defeating the
bill of her Majesty's late Government. (Hear, hear.) The
bill of 1854 was a much bolder and better measure. In that
bill the noble lord proposed to disfranchise 19 nomination
boroughs ; and, in all, he obtained the disposal of 63 seats.
Besides, in determining which seats should be abolished he
was guided by a much better rule than that he had since
adopted, for he took into consideration not merely the num-
ber of the inhabitants, but the number of the present con-
stituency. (Hear.) The noble lord and the Chancellor of
the Exchequer had defended nomination boroughs ; but
their speeches carried the house back to the times of Mr.
Croker. Mr. Croker, who was the creation of a rotten bo-
rough, and who had never ventured to breathe the pure air
of a liberal constituency—(loud opposition laughter)—stood
up to defend Alborough. Mr. Croker established a great
reputation under the system of rotten boroughs ; but he
expired with his system, he was embalmed in the undying
satire of the author of " Coningsby." (Laughter.) The
noble lord had revived the argument of Mr. Croker, and
had invoked the great names of Burke and Macaulay. Cer-
tainly the noble lord never made a greater mistake than
when he cited the example of Lord Macaulay. Surely he
must remember Lord Macaulay's own eloquent denuncia-
tion of the system of rotten boroughs, which he said closed
the door to men of talent, and opened to them only a bye-
way, always low and often filthy through which they had to
creep on their hands and knees. (Hear.) As for the noble
lordhimself, did he not quit Caine and obtain a seat at Leeds
and Edinburgh ? The noble lord would certainly never have
dreamed of being quoted in support of rotten boroughs. (Hear,
hear.) The Chancellor of the Exchequer had alluded to the
example of Pitt, but what were Pitt's own words ? " I avow
myself the enemy of close boroughs, for they are the strong-
hold of corruption, to which I attribute many of the cala-
mities of the country." The Chancellor of the Exchequer
would nevertheless preserve them as nurseries for states-
men, and as harbours of refuge for them when they were
ostracised by the caprice of larger constituencies. But what
sort of harbours of refuge were Harwich, Ashburton, and
Thetford, or which of them since 1832 had introduced a
great statesman to the house ?
An HON. MmemEn—Tiverton.
Mr. JAMES—Tiverton, a nursery ! (Laughter.) Surely
it was not an infant statesman who was nursed at Tiverton
(Hear, hear.) The system of disfranchisement which the
noble lord had adopted was a very extraordinary one. For
instance, Tiverton was still to return two members, but it
had only 750 electors; while Guildford was to lose a seat,
though it had 936. (Opposition cheers.) Again, there was
a borough in which the noble lord (Lord J. Russell) him-
self was supposed to take an interest—Tavistock. It was to
keep its two members, though it had only 467 electors, but
Hertford was to lore a representative, notwithstanding that
it had 803. (Loud cheers.) Once more, Melton, in which
the Whig interest predominated, and which was to keep
both its members, had only 789 voters, but Maldon, which
was to lose one of its seats, had 1,213. (Renewed cheer-
ing.) Lastly, Wycombe was to keep two members with
521 voters, and Dorchester was to lose one with 551.
(Cheers.) The proper mode was not to regard population
alone, but to see which town had in it the largest number
of inhabitants likely to grow into voters. However, this at
least might be said for the noble lord's plan it was a most
fortunate one for the Whig boroughs. (Great opposition
cheering.) Further, let the house observe the absence in
this bill of any lodging franchise ; there was nothing but
a£6 rental. But there was a very large body of intelli-
gent persons who lived in apartments, some of them for
=even, eight, and ten years, and earning from £5O to £lO9
a year and more; and they had no vote. (Hear, hear.)
The noble lord would not, it seemed, condescend to the
adoption of what he (Mr. James) might, without adulation,
say he thought a most valuable part of the bill of the late
Government—namely, the lodger franchise. They might
stigmatise it a fancy franchise, but it embraced a large and
intellectual portion of the community, which would form
an excellent counterpoise to the largo popular element
which was about to be introduced. In the bill of 1854
the noble lord had declared that the payment of rent
was a sufficient test of solvency, and that he would not de-
mand the payment of rates. But now the noble lord had
changed his principle entirely ; and if a£6 rating franchise
be established with a £lO in counties, let the house only
consider how many of the constituencies would be disfran-
chised in consequence of the non-payment of their rates.
A. bill with such difficulties as these in its way surely could
hardly be called a settlement of the question. But the bill,
they were told, was to go into committee, and what late
was reserved for it in another place it was impossible to say.
He thought, however, that Parliament would pause before
it incurred the deep responsibility of rejecting the bill.
There were a number of persons who were dissatisfied es ith
it, but who were offering to it no turbulent or factious op-
position;
and both parties in the house, he thought, were
deeply interested in passing some bill to amend the repre-
sentation of the people. Twice had the house been warned
already by the fate of a minister; let them be careful how
they interfered between the people and the obtaining of
their just political rights. With regard to her Majesty's
Government he thought their treatment of this question
had not been satisfactory. They were bold in their com-
mercial policy, whilst in questions of the highest domestic
importance they were feeble. (Cheers from the Opposi-
tion). This session 'e as likely, he thought, to become me-
morable in matters of social and international progress, but
it seemed to him that her Majesty's Government had lost
a great opportunity, and he regretted that they had so far
disappointed the expectations of a forbearing and confiding
people. (Cheers.)
Mr. HARDY agreed with what had been laid down on
this subject in a former debate, that it was incumbent upon
the noble lord to show what evils were to be removed, what
objects were to be secured, and how the Parliament which
was to succeed the present would be better constituted than
that now before them. The right hon. baronet the member
for Radnor boroughs, and the noble viscount, when speaking
of the necessity for a reform bill, entirely repudiated what
had been stated by the noble lord tho member for the City,
and the latter, in his speech, had sketched out a scheme
which was wholly at variance with that which was then
before the house. This was the result of the Willis's-rooms
compact, but it seemed that in making that compact the
hon. and learned member for Marylebone had not been con-
sulted, and the wishes of his friends had not been consulted;
but it had been put into the hands of an hon. member who
represented the cabinet out of doors, as their agent, as one
of the hon. member's friends had himself said at Manches-
ter. (Hear, hear.) Of the two hon. gentlemen who had
spoken in favour of the bill, the hoe. member for Halifax
had said that it was not a bill which could secure a safe and
satisfactory settlement, but it was intended to relieve the
mass of the people from what they considered to be a sys •
tem of class government. The support of the hon. member
for Birmingham alone rendered this course most suspicious.
ie
t. hon.up Upon
newmhbeart
grwaosubnodlddiodutthoef
the (Cheershou house, ande, but la
cautiousughte r.)
in
hon. gentleman ventureli
threatentmoilonsof people? housepthep?Did he w
withthi esh in-
dignationto of twenty-two
give the franchise to six millions of adults ? Then where
could he rest ? How could he excuse himself with regard
to the remainder of these twenty-two millions ? (Cheers.)
What did Lord Brougham say with regard to the views of
those who were represented by the hon. member for Bir-
mingham e Ile said that if the views of the ultra-free-
traders were carried out, if £150,000,000 were struck eff the
revenue, the army reduced, and the navy brckcn up—the
result would be rebellion, civil war, and eventual subjuga •
tion to such cf their neighbours as had not become converts
to the true faith. (Hear, hear, from the Opposition.) Lord
Brougham had bean no insignificant reformer, but he
could perceive the tendency of all these things. At
the meeting recently attended by the honourable mem-
ber for Birmingham Mr. Wilson foreshadowed pretty
clearly what future reforms were to do. He said that
this reform would not affect the lawn sleeves of bishops,
nor the robes of peers. Such expressions were little
indications of the manner in which Mr. 'Wilson would
employ his transcendent influence in urging on
the masses in schemes which were nothing less than
revolutionary. If these great masses were admitted to the
' franchise they would be carried away by a sudden enthu-
siasm, or by some demagogue who had obtained influence
over their passions, and in one moment the labour of cen-
' turies would be swept away. Mr. Wilson told them, in-
deed, what they might look for at that moment. The radi-
, (Continued in our fourth page.)