The Sun.
London, England, 1860-06-05 00:00:00

2.11.101
I 16

2.14.5
7.4.0

IMPERIAL PARLIAIVIEN'T.

HOUSE OP LORDS—(YESTERDAY.)
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack
at five o'c!, ck.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.
The Oswestry and Newtown Railway, the Wimborne
Minister and Blandford Forum-road, and the London and
North-Western Railway (No. 2) Bills were read a second
time.

The following bills were read a third time and passed :
The Forest of Dean Central Railway; Horsham and
Steyn.ing and Beeding Roads; London and South-Western
(new line to Bristol and Exeter); Wellington (Salop)
Water; Hinckley and Leicester Railway ; Manchester Cor-
poration Water; Stourbridge Railway; Cheshire Midland
Railway; London and South-Western and Bristol and
Exeter Railway Companies ; Salisbury and Yeovil Rail-
way; Disley and Hayfield Railway; Buckley's and Con-
Onay (Flintshire) Railway.
THE SLAVE TRADE.
Lord STRATHEDEN postponed his motion with re-
spect to the appointment of a consul at Mozaxnbique,which
stood on the paper for this evening until the 14th of June.
CHURCH RATES.
A number of petitions were presented against the aboli-
tion of church rates.

THE MILITARY DEFENCES.
Lord MONTEAGLE asked the Under Secretary for
War when the report of Committee upon Military De-
fences of the country would be laid upon the table.
Earl DE GREY and RIPON said when the Secretary
of War laid the report on the table of the house, he should
do the same in their lordships' house. The reason that it
had not already been presented was that after the report
had been sent into the Government, it became necessary to
fully consider the subject. He assured the noble lord
there would be no unnecessary delay.
BANK OF IRELAND.
Earl ST. GERMANS moved the second reading of this
bill, the object of which was to repeal the restriction under
which the bank laboured, namely, the lending money on
real property.

Lord MONTEAGLE said, although he would not op-
pose the bill, he could not but think that the measure was
a very unwise one.

Earl DONOUGHMORE supported the bill. He thought
everything that was possible ought to be done to enable the
banking interest in Ireland to lend money for the improve-
ment of agriculture, because it was the best way to carry
on the great improvements that were at present taking place
in Ireland.
The bill was read a second time.
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS BILL.
This bill, on the motion of the Earl of SHAFTES-
BURY, was read a third time and passed.
TRUSTEES AND 'MORTGAGES, &c. BILL.
This Bill passed through committee.
ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS JURISDICTION
BILL.
The report cf amendments to this bill was brought up
and received.

THE WINE LICENSES BILL.
This bill was brought up from the Commons, and read a
first time.

Their lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—(YESTERDAY.)
The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.
The following bills were read a third time and passed :
Border Counties and North British Railway Companies;
Dover Gas; Dumfries, Lochmaben, and Lockerby Junction
Railway ; Newcastle-upon-Tyne and Carlisle Railway, and
Port Carlisle Dock and Railway, and ('arlisle and Silloth
Bay Railway and Dock Companies; Newry, Warrenpoint,
and Rostrevor Railway.
The following bills were considered and ordered for third
reading :—Aylesbury and Buckingham Railway; Caledo-
nian Railway (Lesmahagow Branches, &c.) ; and Eau
Brink Drainage.

PETITIONS,
Several petitons were presented in favour of the Reform
Bill, in favour of legalising marriage with a deceased wife's
sister, for the speedy passing of the Reform Bill, against
the Registration Bill, for County Court Judges being
entitled to adjudicate in bankruptcy cases, &c.
REFORM BILL—CHALRMAN OF COMMITTEE.
Mr. A. STEUART said that it was his intention to
move on going into committee on the Reform
Bill that for the chairman of committee another
hon. member should be substituted, in order that the
house might have the benefit of the services of the former
in the committee. He asked the right hon. gentleman the
Speaker what was the proper time for making such a mo-
tion ?

The SPEAKER said if the hon member had done him
the honour of intimating his intention to ask him this
question, he would ha've been able to have answered with
more certainty than he could possibly do at present. His
opinion was that the proper time for making the motion
would be when the house was in committee.
THE CLOCK AT WESTMINSTER PALACE.
IL)c, Iv inn. askect the Pint commissioner of Works
whether there was any objection to giving orders for means
to be used for causing the clock to strike the hours upon
the largest quarter bell (the chimes being silent) until a
new great bell shall have been cast, and fully approved.
Mr. CO WPER said that he had been so happy as to
secure the advice and counsel of some of the persons most
eminent for their knowledge in matters relating to bells,
and distinguished for their scientific attainments. These
inquiries were not yet' completed, and therefore he was not
in a position to furnish information as to what course would
be pursued until these gentlemen had made their re-
port. The large bell had been the cause of great annoy-
ance to the house, and the course which he suggested
for the present would be to have the quarter-hour large bell
used, which would answer all the necessary purposes by a
temporary arrangement.
THE PAPER DUTY.
The O'DONOGHUE asked Mr."Ayrton whether it was
his intention to proceed with the motion of which he had
given notice for Thursday next, having reference to the
Paper Duty.

Mr. AYRTON said that when he gave notice of the
motion he thought the house would be in possession of the
report of the Committee on Precedents on Thursday, but as
it was not likely that would be the case, he would postpone
his motion.

HARBOURS OF REFUGE.
Mr. H. SEYMOUR asked the President of the Board of
Trade if he could state the day on which he would intro-
duce his promised bill to carry out the recommendations of
the Harbour of Refuge Commissioners, so far as they re-
lated to giving facilities for the improvement of existing
harbours?

Mr. M. GIBSON said he was unable to appoint a day
for bringing forward the bill in question, as it was neces-
sary to have the opinion of a committee that was then
sitting, and would incidentally consider this subject. How-
ever the bill was already produced, and would be introduced
at as early a period as possible.

REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE BILL.
On the motion for going into committee on this bill,
Mr. HUNT rose to move the following instruction, of
which he had given notice :—" That it be an instruction to
the committee, that they have power to provide increased
facilities for polling at elections."
The SPEAKER considered that the hon. member was
out of order in moving an instruction to a committee to do
what was proposed by him with any such instruction.
Mr. HUNT proposed to add to the last word, " in the
United Kingdom," which he considered would put him in
order.

Lord J. RUSSELL said he must appeal to the Speaker
whether there was not an additional objection to the in-
'lle proposed enouto..
The bill was meant to apply only to the representation of
the people in England and Wales. There were special
bills for Scotland and Ireland.

Mr. HUNT considered that there was no chance of the
two last bills being carried this session.

Mr. T. DUNCOMBE, in reference to the following in-
struction of which he had given notice—" That it be an in-
struction to the committee to give greater facility, and
render more frequent, the registration of voters," made a
few. observations.

Sir H. CAIRNS maintained that the hon. members
were out of order in bringing forward these instructions.
The SPEAKER said that he did not consider that
these instructions could be moved according to the forms of
the house.

Mr. HUNT wished to know whether, supposing there
were no bills for Scotland and Ireland, it would have been
competent for him to have moved this instruction.

The SPEAKER said it was not his duty to give
answers to anticipatory matters.
Mr. GRIFFITH moved that it be an instruction to the
committee that no borough shall be deprived of one mem-
ber until it had been ascertained, by an actual census of
the population of such borough, whether or not the present
number of its population falls below the limit of 7,000 in-
habitants.
The SPEAKER decided that the hon. member was not
in order in his motion, on the same ground that he assigned
in regard to other hon. members who had moved instruc-

tions.
Mr. BENTINCK moved the following : —That it be an
instruction to the committee not to proceed further with the
bill till provision had been made for giving to the counties in
England that share in the representation to which they may
be shown to be entitled by population and by property.

After some discussion it was decided that the instruction
could not be moved. The hon. member then moved the
adjournment of the house, in order to enable him to address
the house.

Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said that the hon. member was
quite out of order in the course he was pursuing. He was
moving the adjournment of the house, and then proceeded
to make an address to the house.

The SPEAKER considered that the hon. member (Mr.
Bentinck) was irregular.
Mr. BENTINCK then moved—" That it be an instruc-
tion to the committee that they have power to make provi-
sion for the better prevention of bribery and corruption at
elections." lie cgitended that the effect of the proposed Re.

form Bill would be to promote bribery and corruption at
elections. He concluded by moving an instruction.
Lord J. RUSSELL said he had no objection whatever
to the introduction of any clauses that would tend to re-
strain and diminish corruption and bribery at elections.
He denied, however, that there was anything in the bill
which he had introduced calculated to [ romote bribery and
corruption, and that the instruction of the hon. mem-
ber would not have the effect he proposed.
Mr. WHITESIDE supported the instruction, and ad-
vised the noble lord (Lord J. Russell) to withdraw the bill,
in order that another and more satisfactory measure might
be introduced.
Sir G. C. LEWIS considered that the question of bribery
and corruption was nut involved in this bill, and that tho
course suggested by the hon. and learned member (Mr.
Whiteside), namely of withdrawing the bill, would be
nugatory. •
Mr. KNIGHTLEY thought the motion of his hon. friend
the member for Norfolk was deserving the consideration of
the house.
Mr. WILD bad listened with much satisfaction to the
remarks of the hon. gentleman the member for Norfolk, and
hought his observations as to the extent of bribery were
very forcible; but when the hon. member moved an in-
emotion to the committee on the subject, he regretted that
he did not also move a remedy to cure the evil of bribery
and corruption. Now he (Mr. Wild) would move an
amendment, namely, that the votes at elections be taken by
ballot— (hear, hear)—and he hoped he would have the hon.
gentleman's vote in support of his amendment. The hon.
gentleman stated that bribery existed and was practised in
boroughs, and not in counties, where he submitted they
had no bribery; but the hon. gentleman seemed to forget
that they had intimidation in full operation there. Now he
(Mr. Wild) contended that bribery an l corruption existed,
if not in the hon. gentleman's part of the country, certainly
in other parts of it, and to a great extent. (Hear, hear.)
He, therefore, proposed as a remedy against such practices,
the incorporation of the ballot in the bill of the noble lord
—a bill which he was quite sure would extend instead of
curtail bribery at elections. (Hear.)
The SPEAKER said the hon. member, if he chose, had
power to introduce a clause in committee, or to bring in a
bill on the subject. But at present the hon. member was
out of order.

Mr. MELLOR believed that no man could be more anxi-
ous than he was to see bribery and corruption discouraged,
and by law put an end to ; but he felt that a more inoppor-
tune moment could not be chosen than the present for ob-
truding those matters upon the consideration of the house,
and he had no hesitation in saying that he did not think
the hon. gentleman was sincere in his motion, and that his
object was to defeat the bill of the noble lord.
Lord R. CECIL hoped the house would entertain the
motion of his hon. friend the member for Norfolk, calculated,
as it way, to lessen the danger and the evils that would
otherwise attend hasty and inconsiderate change. (Hear.)
Mr. BOUVERIE could not help thinking that if those %.
eight pages of amendments should be discussed, the effect
would be to endanger the passing of the bill through the
house, and to prevent it from going to "another place."
(Hear.)

Sir G. GREY said his noble friend (Lord J. Russell) had
merely intimated that he had no objection to assent to the
motion for instruction suggested, without pledging himself
to its detiils. His noble friend had said if the hon. member
should press his amendment on the committee, that he
would not shut him out from doing so; but to that extent
only.

Mr. A. MILLS said that on the part of himself and hon.
gentlemen near him, he disclaimed the imputations
which had been cast upon them by the right honourable
gentlemen oppos to. He declared conscientiously that it
was monstrous and unfair, when they were sincerely desir-
ous that the bill should be moulded in a form that would
be satisfactory to the oountry, that it should be imputed to
them that their opposition was based upon a desire to ob-
struct its passing. (Conservative cheers.) Let them make
an effort to improve the representation in the quarter where
it most needed it—viz., in the principles on which hon.
members attempted to obtain the suffrages of their consti-
tuents. (Hear, hear.) If they voluntarily closed their eyes
to the corrupt tendencies of their own acts, what was the
use of legislating against them ? If they did, however, at-
tempt legislation, let them not merely trust to chance, but
attempt it by a great and comprehensive measure ofreform.
Sir J. HANMER thought the best way of putting down
bribery was greatly to extend the franchise, because, accord-
ing to his experience, the most honest of the electors were
the scot and lot voters. (Laughter.) That he could assure
hon. gentlemen was a simple fact. (Renewed laughter.)
The hon. gentleman having drawn a comparison between
bribery and the dry rot, proceeded to remark that it ought
to be treated in a similar manner, by being " put doWn" as
soon as discovered. (Great laughter.) The best way would
be to put in force the laws against bribery. The process of
disfranchisement ought to be resorted to oftener than at
present, and if that had been done it would have removed
the necessity for that Reform Bill, which was troubling
everybody. (Roars of laughter from the Conservative side.)
As soon as a constituency had been proved to be corrupt, it
should be wholly or partially disfranchised, and the vacant
seat should not be talapended, as in the cases of Sudbury
anti St. Alban's, but transferred to a more deserving body of
electors. Had that been done in times past, a considerable
impression would have been made, not only upon corrupt
practices, but upon the representation generally. If a Re-
form Bill were to pass at all, he maintained now, as he had
years ago declared, that the most extensive one was the
best. (Hear, hear.)
_ _

Mr. F. H. BERKELEY said that, though he was not
a great admirer of the bill, he would accept it ; but ho de-
sired that it should be k .own throughout the country that
the obstruction it had met with did not lie on that (the
Government) side of the house. (Opposition cheers and
laughter, and cries of " Oh.") Nothing could be more mean
than the opposition to that bill on the other side. (Cries
of " Order," from the Opposition.)
The SPEAKER having intimated to the hon. gentle-
man, as was understood, that he was not in order in using
the term " mean,"
Mr. F. H. BERKELEY proceeded to say that, correct
ing himself, nothing could be more improper than the band-
ing
together of the great party opposite, and the indirect
manner in which they had opposed it. (Cheers.) He said
that after the numerous speeches they had heard, none of
them ending with any resolution whatever, and after the
numerous adjournments they had had, it wasrather calling
too much on their credulity to ask them to believe now that
they desired to introduce purity of election as a prominent
feature into the bill, and that that was the reason why they
sought to amend it. The country was aware that the bill
was exceedingly distasteful to the hon. gentlemen opposite,
and that they would do everything in their power to pre-
vent its passing. Something had been said about protect-
ing people by means of voting papers. If the noble lord
were decidedly in earnest in desiring to correct the impuri-
ties that creep into our system of elections, he would not
talk of voting papers, but he would adopt the only real
remedy, namely, the ballot. (Derisive cheers from the
Opposition.) That bill would certainly be thrown out, for
it assuredly could not stand against the delays that had
arisen in its progress. It was perfectly understood that it
would be thrown out by indirect means. He did not think
the Government were in fault. (Ironical cheers.) They
had done their best to pass it. (Renewed cheers from the
Opposition.) All he would say was, let those hon. gentle-
men who thought proper to reject it take its. .eusequenc..
with the people on their ose, ~2,vutders.

Mr. COLLINS aLought that the expense/ of " parify-
ing thp pouutry" should beborne by the Consolidated Fund.
W ere that done, the constituencies would become more
guarded in their conduct at elections.

Lord J. MANNERS protestedagainst the charge which
had been brought against the party with which he had the
honour and the privilege to act, and said if there had been
any unnecessary delay in the progress of the bill through
is sv.o to b.:attributed, not to hon. gentlemen on
that (the Conservative) side of the house—but to the un-
popularity which had attended it from the day of its in-
troduction. (Conservative cheers.)
Mr. A. STEUART said it was admitted that the pro-
posed instruction to the committee should be agreed to, but
he thought something more was expected on the part of
the Government than a bare admission of that description.
It was the duty of the noble lord, after what had been as-
certained with regrrd to corruption in municipal elections,
to bring in a special enactmentparo passu with the Reform
Bill to put an end to those nefarious practices.
After a few words from Mr. Slangy, Mr. D. Griffith, and
Mr. Farquhar, the motion was negatived without a division.
There were two other instructions to the committee on
the paper, in the names of the hon. members for Waterford
and Athlone, relative to a uniform oath to be administered
to all members on taking their seats; but the Speaker
having declared them to be out of order, they were With-
drawn. •
Lord J. RUSSELL—I now rise to move that the house
go into committee on this bill, and in doing so I cannot rel.
train from noticing the objections that have been made, not
in this house but out of doors, to our proceeding with this
b,ll, and stating the course which the Government intend
to take. Now in the first place I will answer a question
which was asked some time ago by an hon. gentleman sit-
ting on this side of the house. He asked me whether it was
our intention to proceed with the Scotch and Irish bills in
the course of the present session. I could not give him an
answer at the time, but I stated I would on a future occa-
sion tell him the views of the Government on the subject.
I Roy( say, that considering that according to our opinion
the English bill should go into committee, and that the
franchise to be settled by that bill should be agreed upon,
and in fact assented to by Parliament before those bills are
proceeded with, we cannot expect that we can proceed with
either the Scotch or the Irish bills in the course of the pre-
sent session. (Hear.) That, however, does not appear to
us to be any reason for not proceeding with the bill that
stands for committee this evening. (Hear, hear.) With
regard to the present bill, I must state the position of the
Government and of this house in respect to it. lam not.
going to state the position of one side of the house or the,
other—to make any reproadh to the other side of the lions%
with regard to their conduct as to this bill ; but I am going
to state the position of the house generally, including
,br,th
sides, on this question. In doing do so I wish serioneV to
call the attention of the house to the subject, because if the
, character of the °oven:mot is involved by t#l Tapia=

which they have introduced and in the time of introducing

it, the character of the house is also implicated bythe mode

in which they deal with that measure. (Hear, hear.) Now,

air, there are two different questions which arise ; first,
with regard to the substance of the measure, and next,with

regard to the time in which we propose now to proceed with it
in committee, With regard to the substance of the measure
I will only mention one point, but it is that point on which
during the second reading almost all objection rested, and

upon which the description of its being a -measure
destructive- of property, giving ignorance power over intel-
ligence, tending to confusion in the state, was based.
Wh at I speak of is the borough franchise; and that frau- I
et& of without now mentioning particularly the rate at
which it is proposed to be placed, is intended to be conferred
with a view, certainly, of giving more power in the repre-
sen'tation of this house to the working classes. (Hear, hear.)
Te) that proposition two objections of different kinds have
b een made. It must be admitted, I think,,,without entering
Into what was done in 1832, that at the present time very
.few persons belonging to the working classes have the right
to vote. An hon. gentleman, at present the member for the
West Riding, stated in the course of our discussion in the
past year, that though he had many men in his employment
of great intelligence, householders of good character and
great respectability, in whom he entirely confided, not one
of those men had a right to vote. Other statements have
been made by other hon. gentlemen of a similar kind. Well,
then, is it the objection that some of the working classes
should be admitted to the franchise, or is it the objection
that this bill would give such a power to the working
classes, that they would overwhelm the rest of the consti-
tuency, and thereby have an undue influence over property?
(Opposition cheers.) With regard to the first objection, I
should say that so long ago as 1852 the right hon. gentleman
the member for Bucks said he was pleased--I do not quote
from "Hansard," but I have it perfectly from memory—
he said he was pleased that I admitted that the working
classes ought to have the franchise. Again, when we wero
discussing the measure last year, the proposition which:was
made by me to the late House of Commons, and which was
carried by a majority, was in the first place that the trans -
fer of the freeholders' votes from counties to boroughs
ought not to be made, and in the next place :that the bill
did not contain a reduction in the borough franchise ; that
is to say, the objection was that there was not an admission
of the working classes by the bill. Well, parliament was dis-
solved upon that vote and. the government returned here.
The right hon. gentleman the member for Bucks stated on
a former occasion that the Government to which he be-
longed and of which he was the leader, had made up its
mind that there should be a reduction in the borough fran-
chise, and that he was prepared to assent to a reduction,
accompanied with such provisions as would guard the safety
of our institutions. The right hon. gentleman spoke, and
I hope he still Speaks, as the organ of the great party oppo-
site. I have seen it stated, I have seen it in print, that the
right hon. gentleman has no longer the confidence of that
great party. (Murmurs from the opposition.) I will state
• where I have seen it. I have seen it in the periodical which
is supposed to be the organ of the Conservative party, the
Quarterly Review. I was happening to be coming to town,
and I read in the Quarterly Review great abuse of my
right hon. friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I was
not surprised at that. There was also great abuse of myself,
and a number of motives were invented for me by this ob-
scure writer. That I was not surprised at either. But as
I went on to read I was very much surprised, for I found
this organ of the Conservative party declare the right hon.
gentleman the member for Bucks, for certain faults im-
puted to him, unworthy of the confidence of the Conserva-
tive party. (Cries of "No, no," from the opposition.) I
quite agree with that expression of dissent from that opi-
nion, because the right hon. gentleman has won his way to
the high position which he holds—(cheers from both sides
of the house)—by great ability in the conduct of public affairs,
and whenever it has been his fortune to pass from that side
of the house to this and to lead the house, his conduct in the
management of those affairs showed that he was fully qua-
lified to conduct the business of the country. Therefore I
am taking note of the opinion of the right hon. gentleman
as still possessing the confidence of the great conservative
party. (Cheers from the opposition.) Well then, I say,
with regard to the question whether or no any of the
working classes should have the franchise, and whether
there should be a reduction of the borough franchise for that
purpose, we have not only the affirmation of the liberal ma-
jority of the last Parliament, but we have the consent and
the co-operation of the right hon. gentleman the organ of
the party which was last year in office. The present Govern-
ment have introduced a bill which they thought did not
carry the franchise lower than it ought to be placed. You
may decide if we have had too much confidence, too much
faith, in the working classes whose houses are at a moderate
rent. That you may say, but that is not a question of prin-
ciple—that is a question of degree; and, indeed, if you dis-
sented altogether from the reduction of the franchise, it is
quite clear you ought to have opposed the second reading of
the bill. (Hear, hear.) You did not do so ; and therefore I
conclude that you are ready to consider the question of the
reduction of the franchise. Therefore I am justified, I think,
in asking both sides of the house to go into committee, be-
cause, the principle being admitted, the question is to what
degree the principle should be carried. After due delibera-
tion we have propoeta the fianvialae syslvira, t. the bill. I
have heard many objections to that franchise. I have heard
it stated that it would in effect overwhelm property and in-
telligence. That again is a question for the committee. This
I will say, that if you will propose any measure that has
been mentioned this evening, either by raising the fran-
chise by making it a rating instead of a rental franchise, or
by raising the amount of rental, or in another way which
has been mentioned this evening, by admitting a great num-
ber of voters who are distinguished by the possession of pro-
perty or a high degree of knowledge rather than as belonging
to the working classes—any proposition of this kind shall
be fairly considered by us in committee, and I certainly will
not take the course of saying that we are completely wedded
in our opinion to the franchise that we have proposed. I
think if we fairly agree in committee to a franchise that the
house should prefer, it will then be our duty to say whether
we think the bill, with such an alteration, would be a valu-
able bill, and to declare, though we might not think it a
change for the better, whether we could adopt it. I will
not speak, there is no necessity to speak, of other parts of
the bill. There is no necessity to speak of the county fran-
chise. I will only say that I think we are in a position to
go into comnrittee on the bill to decide that important ques-
tion. If you object altogether to a reduction of the franchise
it was your duty to have opposed the second reading, and'
to have refused altogether to refer the matter to a com-
mittee; but having agreed that the second reading should
pass without opposition, it is now the duty of the house to
consider in committee what are the particular propositions
which the Government have to make. Well, now I will
take the first objection which is made in regard to the fran-
chise, and that is an objection which an hon. friend of mine
is about to raise by moving "that in order to obtain a safe
andleffective reform it would be inexpedient and unjust to
proceed farther with the proposed legislative measure for
the representation of the people until the house has be-
fore It the results of the census, authorised by the bill
now under consideration." Now, I must say that,
without imputing any desire to cause delay, I cannot re-
concile that motion with any wish to have a bill for the
extension of the franchise. (Cheers.) It would be three
years before the census would be before the house in an
authoritative form, and it is proposed that for three years
we should not go into this question—that whatever may
be the et......estances, whatever the demand, however
strong the feeling may L., there shall be no amend-
ment in the representation of tb... people for three
years. And now with regard to the borouos. franchise.
One may say that the objections to the borough and the
county franchise comprise all the objections to the bill.
During the six nights' debate on the second reading those
were the objections that were raised. And how does the
census of 1851 bear upon these objections ? We have re-
turns—you find fault with them, but we have returns up to
the year 1858-Lwhich do not depend on the census of 1851,
but on the rate-books for the year 1858, and you might have
them to a later period. Therefore, the main question in
dispute has nothing to do with the census of 1851, and this
amendment is a Mere evasion—it is a mere putting off on a
very hollow pretence that which is the question before the
house. (Cheers, and " No.") Can any man contradict me ?
Neither the £6 borough nor the £lO county franchise is in
any way affected by the census. You may say that the £6
holder is too poor, that he is ignorant, and will be bribed,
but when you have got the new census you will be no wiser
as to the character of the £6 and the £lO voter. There is
only one part of the bill that it does affect, that relating to
the distribution of seats. We have taken a certain num-
ber of seats from boroughs with a population under 7,000,
not because the number of 7,000 was absolutely and geo-
metrically and arithmetically necessary in order to entitle
a borough to return two members, any more than in the
bill of last year the number of 6,000 was, in the opinion of
the late Government, necessary to return two members ; but
have taken the boroughs at the bottom' of the scale, and
have said it was desirable that places with a large popula-
tion which are now insufficiently represented should have
some of the members which the smaller boroughs are now
entitled to return. There might be a transposition of one
or tno of those boroughs, but no one can alter their posi
Hon. They are the boroughs which have the smallest po-
pulation, and have the smallest importance. It may be that
one borough has gone up 500 and another gone down 500,
and if we wait till the year 1863 we shall arrive at the fact
as regards the one borough or the other ; but as regards
the material interests of the country, as regards the
great question of representation, it has no importance.
I have made all the observations that I wished to offer on
this question as on a question affecting the character of the
house, and not as saying that the opponents of the present
Government were bringing forward objections to the bill
for purposes of delay. (Hear.) If hon. gentlemen opposite
xay, "Here is a dangerous and a revolutionary
we do not think it our duty to entertain," I believe, which
theic
public might think that opinion hasty, but they would at
all events regard it as sincere. If, however, they say that,
though they have already entertained the bill and iven it
a second reading, they will not proceed with it any further,
alleging the paltry pretence that in three years they would
have more information as to the amount of population in
certain boroughs, then I say that nobody will believe there.
-(Cheers.) I now come to the other excuse, which I have
seen madefor not proceeding with the measure, viz., that we
arriyed at the 4th Jane, and that it is too- late to eater

into committee, because we must take into consideration the
remaining estimates for the year. If the question was with
regard to the army or navy estimates I could understand
that argument, because those are estimates of very great im-
portance; but I cannot conceive how hon. gentlemen can
say that they are in such haste to consider the miscellane-
ous estimates that they cannot proceed with a measure of
such importance as the amendment of th : representation.
Recollecting what had been done in former sessions I have
looked to see at what time the miscellaneous estimates were
considered in those years in which there was no dissolution,
and I find that in 1851 they were considered on the 7th, the
11th, the 14th, and 17th of July; in 1853 they were consi-
dered en the 4th, sth, and Bth of August ; in 1854 on the 3d,
6th, 7th, 25th, 2 th, 27th, and 31st of July; in 1855 on the
26th, 30th, and 31st of July, and on the Ist and 2d of August;
and in 1858 on the 9th, 12th, 14th, and 15th of July. It has
latterly, therefore, been the custom, when there was no
dissolution, not to consider the miscellaneous estimates till
a much later period than the present ; and with regard to
some of the years I have enumerated, it cannot be said that
there were pending any measures of such supreme import-
ance that the house was required to put the estimates off
till the last moment. No doubt those estimates give rise to

very interesting discussions—debates, for instance, upon
education in Great Britain and Ireland, upon the principles
of religious liberty as regards the regium donum, upon ques-
tions of criminal justice, upon the application of the fine
arts to the houses of parliament, and matters of that kind,
but although those are interesting topics of discussion, it
has not been in the power or the inclination of the house to
1 effect any great reduction. I remember an occasion on
which the house refused a grant to obtain two pictures of
Sir Edwin Landseer, which would no doubt have been ad-
mirable pictures of animals by which a part of the House of
Lords might have been adorned. On another occasion it
refused the salary of a gentleman who had been sent abroad
by the trustees of the National Gallery to choose pictures ;
but if I were to state the economy which has been effected
during the last seven years at £2,000 a year I should be ex-
aggerating. (Hear.) I cannot believe, then, that there has
sprung up all on a sudden such a zeal for economy, or that
the spirit of reduction and retrenchment should so suddenly
have seized the house that they cannot wait till July to
consider the miscellaneous estimates. (Hear.) lam told
that during the last year or two a change has been made in
our financial system by which there ii not so large a sur-
plus left in the exchequer ; and that in order to allow the
civil service estimates to go till July or the beginning of
August, it may be necessary for the Secretary to the Tree •
sury to ask from time to time, as he did the other day, for
some moderate votes on account. But that is merely a ques-
tion of detail; and it is a question which would not post-
pone the consideration of the miscellaneous estimates to a
period at all later than the usual one. (Hear.) I can only
say, therefore, of this excuse as I said of the other—if the
house were to represent that it was seized with such a sud-
den zeal for retrenchment on the civil service estimates,
and on the estimates for education in Ireland, for the fine
arts and similar matters, that it would not go into commit-
tee on this bill—l believe that even if it reduced the votes,
its sincerity would be very much mistrusted, and it would
not be believed that the neglect of several years had been
followed by a sincere and sudden retrenchment. On the
contrary, it would be attributed to a desire to get rid of this
bill without having the manliiiess to say that the house did
not wish to pass it. (Cheers.) With regard to the time
at which we have arrived I will remind hon. members that
we are only at the beginning of June, and that our ses-
sions usually go on till the beginning, the middle, or even
the end of August. There is no reason why there should
be an earlier prorogation this year. Indeed there is no
time positively fixed for our adjournment. We are not like
the American Congress, the session of which is restricted
within certain limits ; and if we have important business
before us there is no reason why we should not settle it,
and why the House of Lords should not undertake it, as
they have undertaken many other measures in other times,
at a period when it would be perfectly possible to give it
their consideration. (Hear.) I have now stated the reasons
why I think the house should go into committee on this bill,
and should decide the various questions which will come
before it. I have argued on other occasions that if we post-
pone these questions, there would be an uncertainty—that
at least we must all admit—as to any other period at which
another measure could be brought in. You have decided to
give this bill a second reading, and you have decided that
after six nights' debate, and if another bill were brought
forward in another session, you would have to go through
another debate on the second reading ; you would have all
those arguments repeated, and probably with the same re-
sult. That would involve a consumption of public time and
a delay which would be perfectlyunnecessary. (Hear, hear.)
And what might be the time at which the question would
be re-opened ? You might have, as you have now, a time
of tranquillity when you are at peace with all the nations
of Europe ; but it might also be a period of commercial dis-
tress. (Hear, hear.) It might be a period when war ap-
peared to be threatening this country ; when men would be
very loth to enter upon such a question; and certainly when
they would not be able to give it a dispassionate considera-
tion. If you can but make up your minds as to what your
franchise should be, if you can adopt either the proposition
of the Government, or some other proposition which might
seem wiser or more fitting to improve the representation,
and at the same time woula De consistent sena me bit', in 1
of your institutions, let the house calmly consider it. We
have done our duty in bringing the question before you.
(Cheers.) It is for you to dispose of it; but do not forget
that the language which has been used with regard to the
£6 householders, with regard to the poorest of those who
would by their means have the franchise, has been such,
that though in a time of prosperity it might well pass away,
if it came back at a time of commercial distress, it might
well cause irritation. (Hear, hear.) I have alluded to an
article in a periodical which is generally supposed to repre-
sent a great party ; and this is thew ay in which it speaks
of the effects of this bill—" Some say that the publicans
are to be our masters ; others the trades' unions. It is a
blessed choice—between debauchery and crime." (Hear,
hear.) Phrases such as these sink in the mind. I believe
that among the working classes there are many men to be
found of greater intelligence and equal integrity with
householders of £lO. (Hear, hear.) Many of the latter are
beershop keepers and small shopkeepers ; and I believe that
workingmen in many cases have fully as much intelligence
and as much integrity. (Cheers.) When it is sail that if
you adopt this bill you will be governed by debauchery or
crime, can such language produce any effect but irritation ?
If you go on to consider the details of this bill and to settle
what your franchise should be, what has been said will
have but a passing effect ; but if you leave this question
open by the declaration that has taken place—eloquent as
that declaration may have been—you will have dug a ditch
between the working and the richer classes, of which you
may have occasion to repent. (Hear.) I therefore seriously
and earnestly ask the house to go into a consideration of
this bill. If you think that its provisions are rash, put in
better and more secure ones in their place, but do not, when
you have such a question before you, attempt to evade or
conceal its importance. Such a course will not produce any
feeling of trust in your sincerity, or respect for your deci-
sion. (Cheers.) I beg leave to move, sir, that you now
leave the chair.
Mr. DISRAELI was not surprised, after the lengthened
period which had elapsed since the noble lord had last ad-
dressed the house on the subject of the bill, that he should
hava gone at some length into a statement of its principles
and of its present position. The noble lord appeared to
him, however, to have spent a considerable portion of his
time in giving reasons why the Conservative party should
have consented to the second reading, and then to com-
plaints against them for having allowed it to be read. The
noble lord had stated accurately enough, though not with
perfect accuracy, the observations which he (the right hon.
gentleman) had made so long ago as 1852. Being then a
Minister of the Crown he had certainly expressed his
opinion after a measure of reform brought forward
by the noble lord had recently failed, that both in that
measure, as well as in me act or 166 Z, tne claims of She
working classes had not been considered. That was an opi-
nion which he had not expressed merely in 1852. It had
always been his opinion, and in 1859, whatever differences
of opinion there might be as to the means by which he en-
deavoured to carry it into effect, there was no doubt as to
the sincerity of the attempt which he made to give, in some
measure, representation to the working classes. (Hear,
hear.) Then the noble lord said that after the general elec-
tion he (the right hon. gentleman) had recognised, on the
phroeauirntgofsg in.th favour eTlhao oteseGovernment, the verdict of the country as
ofn tsomethat
side reductionof th
the house
the
did
not franchise
w i insh bo-
roughs. o-
for.
one moment to shrink from the admission they had made
but
circumstancesthe d e duet iioun
qs
uwe hi s
tich on
were
he b
er
enol elord h
somewhat
acl drawn
inconsistent.
o It
might be necessary to admit the principle of the bill, which
they had done by voting for the second reading ; but it was
not consequent upon the opinions which they had expressed,
or the pledges, if the noble lord chose, they had given,
that they should approve of the general policy of the noble
lord. The noble lord said that all but the principle of the
'bill was a mere matter of detail ; but the noble lord seemed
to have quite forgotten that he had assumed a line of rea-
soning which no minister before him had adopted. He
came forward and introduced a bill based upon the principle
of numbers ; and documents had been placed in the hands
of hon. members of which the noble lord would not for one
moment pretend to say that the accuracy had been upheld.
In another house, so important had these returns been con-
sidered, that the labours of an eminent committee had been
incessantly devoted to their examination ; and if they were
to believe rumour, the result of their lordships' investigation
was in accordance with the generally received opinion.
(Hear.) But the whole policy of the noble lord depended
upon the fact. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord proposed to
entrust political power to a certain number of persons ; and
it was, therefore, important that the probable number of
those to whom the franchise would be extended should be
ascertained. The noble lord could not, therefore, be sur-
prised if hon. members who were willing to see all classes
directly represented should recoil from a measure which
was perhaps founded upon a grave inaccuracy, and which
might, therefore, entail upon the country most serious con-
sequences. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord had not suc-
ceeded in establishing any charge of inconsistency against
those who sat on those (the Conservative) benches. They
were not enemies of the working classes ; on the contrary,
the policy of the Tory party had never been unfavourable
to those classes, (Load Conservative cheers.) They had