The Sun.
London, England, 1860-03-20 00:00:00

IRE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, MARCH 20, 1860.

.
were more remarkable for their action tltaati=fortheir pie-
science. I am -not 'eatrpeised , et.- that,- Man la- rather an
ctive than a aptiteitoplritien 'creature. It is the privilege of
est Meti n' ability to be active in details ; but it is the pri-
'lege of very feweto_have.the pews of prediction. __.l think
upon the whole it is better for England that public opinion
in thisaceuritryshould* he generally rather in advance of
Publicanenthan that it ohenld be the reverse. One :result
as been to mate this assembly a pricticitliMe; and although
dotasionally we niahavehltindered, it is better to blunder
by adhering to an 61d established system than to blunderby
dopting aneiv system thachas never been tried. (Hear.)
ut en this Parliamentary Reforin question, I admit that
. nglish statesmen have been much to blatne. There can
&
be na doubt that when the Ban of Wellington was mini-
ater, and before the first Iteform Bill, warnings were given
that were unhappily discarded, and opportunities were lost
that .might. have been, seized .with great Windage to the
country;, and I take it fergranted that the noble. lord the
Secretary for Per a? Affairs, remembering that re-
markable' instance of want of prescience on 'the part
of one of the greatest men this country has ever produced,
and the great advantage which was adroitly obtained by the
Whig party in 1832 in consequence, has always been
nervously .alive lest he should.make the. same mistake, and
'be deficient in that prescientprudence which a statesman is
lalwayeanxione to exhibit.. Therpfere. ',believe that when,
, 10 years ago, the noble lord re-opened this question, he re-
opened it from a sound and holiest principle. The house
knows the history of those 10 years. The noble lord has
bean in. nffice.more or less during.that time, . Hellas kept
'this question always alive, so that when he was out of office
it would always be taken down out of the armoury of poli-
tics and brandished in the face of • a Conservative Ministry'.
Theatitne . had come .when,. in. our. opinion, the. question
should be terminated, and we endeavoured to terminate it on
conditions which, I think, are now spoken of more kindly in
the Country than when they were first introduced, and which
Conditions; if they had been 'accomplished, would have se-
cured the constitution. But I believe the noble lord was pre-
mature in the measure which he introduced 10 years ago,
and that those who followed him are also, in a certain de-
gree, to blame. Our course was, to a certain degree, in
self-defence, because it was impossible to carry on the Go-
vernment of the country while the question was left un-
settled. But Ido not wish te escape from my share of the
responsibility of that premature conduct. This, however,
may be said in my excuse, and in excuse of the noble lord, and
his successors, and hill colleagues, that the time was oppor-
tune if changes were required. The time was opportune to
anticipate political necessities. The country was tranquil and
prosperous ; there was a prospect of, foreign tranquillity as
Well as of domestic content. What is the condition of things
now ? (Hear, hear.) Is the state of affairs the same as when
the noble lord and his successors endeavoured to deal with
this question? A great military nation, matchless in valour,
with a public organisation more complete than any that has
existed since the days of ancient Berne; abounding in re-
sources of men, money, and military material, and so ena-
moured of glory that it has freely bartered freedom for
fame, no longer conceals its purpose, of general empire. ' So
far as Europe is concerned the prospect is infinitely more
dangerous than it was in thedays of the' great monarch. In
the days of Louis XIV, Europe was full of military energy.
Europe now is prostrate and spiritless. As far as England
is concerned the prospect is infinitely more dangerous than
in the days of the French Republic, or in the days of the
old French Empire. France was then our implacable foe;
France is noir our unswerving friend. Franco then menaced
our hearths • France now decorates our citizens. France
then harassed our trade by a continental blockade; France
now facilitates our commercial intercourse, by treaties ,of
commerce. There is nothing now to keep the English people
watchful and awake. Superior to rapine, hardly condescend-
ing to force, France is building:up a colossal despotism by
all the advanced arts and artifices of the moat decided and
declared liberalism, byuniversal suffrage—(hear)—bysecret
voting—(bear)—by electoral districts. (Cheers.) Will you
never be warned ? (Opposition cheers.) Is this the time
and, the condition of affairs when you should attempt feebly,
but in the same track, to imitate those political doctrines?
Is thiS the time when you should still further deviate from
that old, that free, and that aristocratic constitution which
has framed the liberties of Englishmen and secured the
empire of England ? I must say that, is not my opinion.
The noble lord the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs,
since the night when he entered into the fatal pledge, when
he sat on this side of the house, which has placed his Go-
vernment in consequence in a position of great embarrass•
ment, has been called Upon to preside over an office of the
State very different from that which he then contemplated.
The noble lord is in receipt every day of information re-
specting our foreign affairs which may well make him look
grave, and the perusal of which I think cannot but
teach him that it is a great thin). for a Minister if he can
fall back upon the ancient institutions of a country which
have proved by-their existence their ability to stem any
storm. (Cheers.) Well, air; that being the ease, I will
not relinquish the hope that,befoee we are summoned to go
into committee, a relieved. House of Commons and a grate
ful people will learn from the noble lord that this unneces-
sary, this uncalled'fon and this mischievous measure will
be withdrawn. (Cheers.)
Mr. LEATHAM considered one of the groat merits of
the bill to be its simplicity, and that no attempt had been
made to puzzle them with a variety of franchises. •(" Hear,
hear," from Mr. Bright.) One of the great defects of the
bill was the timid and tender way in which her Majesty's
Government- proposed to deal with the microscopical con-
stituencies of the country. So chivalrous was the noble
lord that he let every borough in England, however small
and however corrupt, retain its members, and consequently
its powef, the same as the gigantic borough of Salford. The
noble lord had told the 'house that large commercial caiiisti
tuencies did not send up great statesmen; but the noble
lord himself represented a great constituency, and so did
the noble viscount at the head of the Government, until,
probably for motives of personal convenience, ho retired to
Tiverton. The Chancellor of the Exchequer likewise re-
presented a great constituency, and so did the Secretary for
Ireland. It appeared to him (Mr. Leathern); on the contrary,
that great cities and counties vied with each ether on that
point, and that if they did not send up any more statesmen
it was because there were no more great statesmen to send.
(Laughter.) He (Mr. Leatham) regretted ,that the noble
lord should expend all his compassion upon the electors of
these small boroughs, and have none for the hundreds of
thousands of electors unrepresented all over the country.
He regretted also that the noble lord should not have dealt
with the great-national question in a more statesmanlike
manner than by referring to parliamentary majorities. On
one occasion the noble lord had acted otherwise, and had he
done so on this occasion, though lie might have lost the
cbnfidence of the house, would have won, as he did on
that Occasion, th Confidence of thecountry. The noble lord
was misled when he stated that the people of the country
cared nothing for Parliamentary reform; they were, on
the contrary, narrowly watching the course to be taken by
the house, and though no violent agitation was Manifested
in relation to Reform, passions were asleep wlalch it would
not be wise to awake, and powers that the house would not
care to Lae. He regretted, finally, that her Majesty's Go-
vernment should have taken the Coarse they had done, be •
cause the work which engaged theta that day would have
to be recommenced on the morrow--(hear)—anil recom-
menced, too, with the arrears of'legislatieh; and he regretted
ft all the more, as a great opportunity was thus thrOwn
away of winning the confidence of the people. of the coun-
try—(hear)—ofadding a new light to the State, of adding
a new lustre to the CroWn, and' ofadding a glorious contri-
bution to the history of England. (Hear.) '
Mr. H. J. B.ULLIE could not concur in the advice
given by Mr. Disraeli that the bill should be withdrawn.
On the contrary, he hoped the time had arrived when the
house would be able to pass a satisfactory and permanent
measure of Parliamentary Reform ; for he thought
that it was far better that our institutions shOuld have a
more democratic basis than that year after year the question
should be bandied from hand to hand, and made an instru-
ment of agitation by the leading statesmen in the house.
One defectin the bill, however, was the retention of *small
nomination boroughs, which he regarded'as an anomaly in
our representative system; and he thought that a house-
hold rating franchise would have been preferable to. the £6
rental proposed by the bill. , • ,
Mr. BAXTER supported the bill, which with all its de-
fects he believed would be a great imprOVement, and add to
rather than detract from its proposer's fanie.
Mr. 'ItOLT took the true principle of the measure to be
the-severance of the representation Of the people from the
property of the country. It was a step towards Ameri-
esealsin,g our institutions, and the effects he anticipated froni
it he regarded with dismay. Thenceforward the policy
of the GovernMent and the 'legislation of that house
would be tinctured by the feelings of a class of the popula-
tion lower in education and intelligence than the 'existing
constituency, and cease to be the reflex of the deliberate
and matured convictions of statesmen and legislatbrs. So
thinking he should give the measure an emphatic " no."

Mr. W. F. CAMPBELL said his •pinions were founded
on the merits of the bill itself, and he was not influenced by
party or local ties. The first remark which he had intended
to make had been anticipated by the member for Hudders-
field, who observed that this bill contained no protection
for the voter against illegal influences. He (Mr. Campbell)
would venture to submit to that portion of the house which
was in favour of such protection that if it were ignored in
such a measure as this, at such a moment, the position of
the question becomes far less hopeful. It was one thing for

the Government to refuse the protection of the ballot when
denaanded as an isolated measure, but it was quite another
thing for the Government to ignore and pass over that pro-
tection at the very moment at which they presented to the

hens* and country a scheme by which it was hoped that the
country would acquire reform. The measure was supposed

ol.!e preguaEt with mpose, and by it the ballot would be

flung teA'greater distance and made more untenable than

before. He contended that the measure was not founded on

sufficient information as to the classes which it affected.

The returns presented afforded them no means of ascertain-

Lug in the counties the proportion which the freeholders

would bear to the new electors under an extended Chandos

clause. If they wanted proper statistics, they should go to
a man like Mr. Newmarch, who, in one of his valuable
papers, read not long ago before the Statistical Society,
computed that in 18534 the number of freeholders in coun-
ties was 315,196. These returns pointed out to them that the
number of oeenpying tehants of Wand upwards in counties
was 567,560, giving to that class over the freeholders a ma-
jority of 252,364, or 80 per cent. It might be said since 1853
freeholders had increased. It might be contended also that
some deductions should be made from the gross number of
occupying tenants in the counties of £lO and upwards ; but
they had no means of ascertaining what deductions from
the other class were requisite. Whatever change they im-
ported into the county franchise, the 40a. freeholders ought
still to be the predominant element. A year ago Parliament
overthrew an Administration to preserve inviolate the 40s.
freeholders; and the same considerations should induce the
house to pause before it consented to the present measure,
wilieh would thrust those freeholdmi throng hout the coun-

rle refi?rrod to a speech made Nome
it the membor for Jtoolalalo
toll iii,;.liciirere, that,
-looking to the
~.itiOns—iookirg to the botirdir sct
at: all judicious chankes in the Reform
Act-,--the Lest and wisest course for any Government to

iic into a thin

time Ar., .y t I

~;

(Ali; 7.id Not It
looking to t!te I,lolcr of the Public alti

pursue was to renounce ambitious, scheanes.warned by pre-
vious failures, and, session after session, to direct their legis-
lative care to those parts of our system in which practical
remedies could be applied to demonstrated ends. (Hear•)
The.main question, as
.it appeared to him, was, how long
this alteration of cur representative system would stand;

and' before the house could come to a conclusion upon
tlapt. .1-licy.on:.;•ht to consider tow far the measure

t4ilk`24vway icy cwaus wi4icl), ,C944ibatG4 Pg47.0•.4

iien4i--of that system and introdricod new elernett
turbanee. One of the first of these disturbing _eleneenti
was to fbe fettndlifthe policy ofthis hon. friends below the
gpangway: To their influence the country owed the bills
o'f 1852, 1854, 1859, and the present bill. Were any of
them prepared new to' say that they'iiecepted this bill as
a Fettloi*at of tho qneet.iele ? —But: isVenif tome of theta
did say, in, a more exact, consideration, of the fats .Verni/d
shoW that this could not be the case. Their conduct ever
since 1333 had at least the merit of consistency. Ever
since the Reform Act was passed they had declared that
they looked forward to its alteration; but, so long as there
common been cemon evils to abate, and common measures to
advance, they had been content to act with the main body
Of the Liberal party in this house, and to keep this ques-
tion in abeyance, When such questions were exhausted,
hon. gentlemen below the galigWay Would have no choice
left them but to urge upon the country those organic
changes which they had Ho long advocated. That was one
cause which threatened the permanence of the new arrange-
tient picipOsed by 'the noble lord. Another was the desire
for change which sprang up from time to time among the
Working classes, and that would not be in any way affected'
by the bill. Another was the impulsive and restless feel-
ing that occasionally pervaded the electoral body itself
and a fourth was the effect which Continental changes and
revolutions had upon the public mind at home. All these
Causes of disturbance, threatening as they were to the per-
manence of the new institutions, would be left wholly un-
touched by the bill. It might, however, be said these ob-
jections were of too general and abstract a nature. Let
them, then, descend to particulars, and first take the £lO
rated occupiers in counties. The house was asked to place
in the counties, as a defensible and permanent body of
electors, the very class who had just been proved not to be
defensible in boroughs. (Hear.) Did they think that the
franchise which they had been unable to maintain in the
boroughs would act better in the counties ? (Hear, hear.)
He knew that right hon. gentlemen opposite proposed that
franchise last year—(hear)=but he did not understand that
they were now committed to such a scheme, and for his own
part he saw many and grave objections to it. As regarded
the £6 franchise in boroughs, there was no reason to sup-
pose that. that arrangement would be more enduring than
the £lO borough franchise had been. The £6 franchise
did not coincide with any natural division of society, it in-
cluded a large class, who, from their poverty, must, with-
out any blame or reproach to them as individuals sympa-
thise with all agitations or movements for political and
social changes. If the measure was carried, therefore, they
would not -have the same men to defend existing institu-
tions as they had now. Men did not defend institutions
unless they stood behind either an epoch or a principle, and
in this case he saw neither the one nor the other, and on
that ground he saw nothing in the bill which should recon-
cile the country to the adoption of the bill. The measure,
however, ought not, he would say, to be judged on that
ground alone. The question also arose whether, if carried,
it would le•sen some of the most acutely-felt and the most
generally acknowledged defects of the Reform Act. These
defeats came home to the perception of all parties in that
ouse—they had been experienced for the last 30 years, and
the question was, whether the bill proposed any remedy for
them. One of these defects arose from the nature of the bo-
rough franchise ; it was uniform on the one hand, and at
same time it not equal on the ether, and thishael caused
at once a difficulty in either maintaining or extending it. If
it was-rapidly extended the Mere numerical majority would
become the predominating power in the State. In the bills
of 1852,18.54, and 1859, that had been met by providing' a
variety of franchises, but no such provision appeared in this
bill. Even the noble lord himself was inconsistent in this.
respect, and failed' to meet one great defect. Tho pressure
of the masses upon the Intelligence of the country would
be augmented, not diminished by the bill, and it would be
more difficult to defend the defects of this bill should it
pass into a law than it was to defend and maintain the act
of 1832. Ono great defect in the borough constituencies
he believed all parties in that house were most desirous to
put down, though, with thedesire which existed for seats
in Parliament, he did not Hee that this bill did anything
tudiminish it. It, was the corruptibility of the borough.
electors. (Laughter.) So long as there was this strong
and uncontrollable desire to become members of that,
house—(laughter)—he saw in that measure no means
of-preventing :corruption. There was no reason to suppose
that voters with a qualification between £lO and £2O would
be lees liable to be influenced by bribery and corrupt
motives than • those who would have a qualification of £6
and under £lO, but the contrary. Gentlemen who were
well acquainted with constituencies knew that the region
orvenality lay mainly between the £lO and the £2O voters'
--(greet laughter)-.-and the question was, what proportion
of such voters would be added to the counties. Allowances
must be made for the excess in some respects over the ac-
. tfial number of rated occupiers in counties between these
mans ; but taking the returns as they stood, they would give
rated occupiers above £lO, and under £2O, 365,987; rated
occupiers at £2O and upwards, 255,990 ; being an excess of
109,936 of voters under £2O. He would ask whether that
fact gave the house any hope that the corruption and bri-
bery which'eitisted under the present act would be ditni•
nished if this measure was passed ? Between 1688 and 1832
there weir four great cases of exclusion from this home,
Lord Bolingbroke, when Mr. St. John, was without a seat
in the house between the periods when he was Secretary'
ter War:and Foreign Secretary. Passing over 100 years they
then came to Mr. Sheridan, who WaS out of Paeliament
from 1812 to 1816: Then there was Lord Brougham, who
was also excluded for four years. Then there was the right
hon, baronet the memberfor Carlisle (Sir J. Graham) who
was without a seat from 1820 to 1826. Then again the pre-
sent Earl of Carlisle,when Lord Morpeth,was excluded from
the house. The house and the country had' also for some
period lost the services of the hon. members for Rochdale
(i'yle: Cobden) ;arid Birmingham (Mr. Bright). Even Lord
Macaulay was excluded end had to resign his position in
the Cabinet. Theee were exclosions which he believed neither
Parlialentary nor, national feeling would sanction : but on
the contrary he th.olight it would hasten to prevent them if
it had the power to do no. No man either in Parliament or
Out of doors even those electors who took an active part in
causing those exclusions—would deny the persons whom
he, had enumerated were not entitled to seats in Parlia-
Merit.' `.(Hear, hear.) The conclusion therefore was that
the Parliamentary and, national' feeling *ere without a
Voice in those respects. A general election, though an
effective engine for expressing the national. opinion, had
proved insufficient for a returnee, Parliament of all men
whom the public voice would desire to send there. Now,
assuming those matters to be'an evil, the manner in which
the present bill. affected it demanded the Serious considera-
tion of the house. (Hear.) Jnfortunately the present bill
but aggravated toe evil—(hear)—because while it left four
it disfranchised 25 seats, which were open to the whole
tan.!re sooiety, and open also to the whole range
of railiamentitiy ability, and had called into existence seats
which, while they were meritorious and valuable in their
e4..rn way, were not always so. He did not disparage large
cities nor counties; but no one would venture to maintain
that the, latter presented a fair field, except to those who
had large properties in those counties, nor the former exe
cept to those who were largelymixed up with manufactur-
ing and commercial interests in the boroughs, • It was not
his intention,to ask the hpuse not to read.theaill a second
time ; but merely to prevent that stage being adopted with-
out submitting that while it offered no protection to the
voter, it left them in doubt, and more than doubt, as to the
position of the freeholders in counties. The bill,' in fact,
gs,ve no guarantee of permanency, and imparted no good
result, unless a dissolution should be, viewed in'itself as an
object to be coveted, and an end to be pursued. (Hoar.)
Mr. LIDDELL apprehended that persistence in this
course of legislation would inevitably result in' placing all
power in the hands of the " mob," by which he meant the,
Iteistweselthee the leiest independent, and the least intelli-
gent portion of the• eiminunity. He believed the country
ep'athetic upontWsubject of Parliainentary reforin, for
the obvious reason that it was contented with the existing
system ; and he warned the house to proceed •with caution,
lest by the adoption of a crude and Inconsiderate scheme
they destroyed the great landmarks of the constitution.

Mr. BRIGHT said that in one respect he was in the same
j position as the right hon. gentleman the member for Bucks :
he did not rise for the purpose of asking the house to divide
on the second reading of the bill, but he did not concur with
the right hon. gentleman when he endeavoured to con-
vines the house that the bill was a dangerous, if not a fatal
measure. On the contrary, he would discuss it in the
spirit of a person anxious for the passing of a sound and
useful measure, and willing to make considerable allow-
ances for the difficulties which' the Governmust must be
placed in in dealing with the question. From what had been
said in the house, as well as out of doors, it was evident
that there were two kinds of objectors, namely, one class
who thought it went too far, and . another for, whom it did
npt go far enough. This bill was offered tothe house' in
the fulfilment of a pledge given by the noble lord the mem-
ber for London during the existence of the Government, of
Lord Derby. The noble lord said he would bring in a bill
differing from the scheme of the right hon. gentleman then
Chancellor pf the Exchequer, and from a measure which
'he (Mr. Bright) had taken some trouble to explain to his
countrymen. The noble lord said that in any bill he should
introduce he should extend the county franchise to £lO
occupatipn, and the borough franchise to £6, and that with
regard to the distribution of seats he was not prepared to
disturb more than 25 or 30. (Hear, hear.) They who had
seen the bill and who iad heard the noble lord's declaration
must admit that, if the measure passed, the noble lord had
redeemed his pledge. In regard to the question of the dis-
tribution of seats, be confessed he was one who for a great
many years had held the opinion that it was much better
to have this question of reform approached by successive
steps. (Ironical cheers.) The difficulty was notorious, of
disposing of 50 or 60 small boroughs which ought to be dis-
posed of, and so far he agreed wish the hon. member for
Inverness (Mr. Baillie), that the Government would feel
itself incompetent satisfactorily to arrange that matter. He
took the liberty of recommending to the noble lord about a
year and a half ago, and repeatedly since in public, that
the Reform Bill should settle the question of the suffrage
simply and generously. He thought after what had been
done both the country and the public would be better pre-
pared to give attention to small boroughs, and to' come
to some more satisfactory arrangement than could be
(lend by a bill introduced such as this was. He said so much
because he was not going to complain of a bill because it
was not a great disfranchisement of small boroughs and did
not propose a great enfranchisement of the electors. He
regarded the measure as one which did not settle the ques-
tion of enfranchisement more than on the outside. (Hear.)
He was only telling them what they were all already aware
of. The bill did not settle the question of enfranchisement
—it rather unsettled it. It would only add one more pre-
cedent to the measure of 1832, and would justify what fur-
ther demand the country might make in regard to that one

branch of Parliamentary reform. He considered the ques-

tion of the transfer of members' seats from little boroughs

to large constituencies to be the pith and marrow of the
question of Parliamentary reform. The right hon. gentle-
' 2aail 01,1);,,ite, the member for Buckinghamshire, in his

f~neeclt t 0 iii lit, surmocded in perplexiti-F; his followers on
the. pilzt of the bill•beifw: too .extensive_ The rigßt hen.
.vos peculiarly .roisty, when he endeavourcd to
iippciir in the light of souaething! very dread-
ful, and yet it was impossible for him to make the house
believe ,that it was a measure extending beyond that, which
the Government ought to propoSe or that Parliament ought
to pass. Now, the Parliamentary representation of thA
kingdom was either a reality or a sham. What could be

thought of it when no more than one million of men out of
seven millions in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Ireland were entitled to vote for members of that house?
In the case of a grdat many counties the representation was
as good as dead. There was no opportuniti, for bribery in
pucL owitio—(hsar)-144 t s 0 Pqiiri it Krcavai cf M A

litattteAf ialeftUreLte: tinulet it.rrilA hive boarijso b!, Lose
-who had to-pay--that a great-many donsfineentieshad not .
even the liberty to ,sell themselves. (Hear.) But if ones
_ .
half of the constituencies of those tounties were in this
condition,' they, on the other Mind, knew that ill one-half of
the boroughs, probably, coercion and corruption did their
work. A teal Onct fide representation was not, under the
present system, obtainable amongst the populations in those
,semen boroughs. Well, if that be so, he wanted to know
' whether the right hon. gentleman opposite really believed
that 1,000,000 of voters out of 7,V00,000' of men was a
satisfactory state of the representation ? He asked whether
it was safe or wise to maintain any longer such a state of
things, The hon. and learned gentleman who spoke from
the opposite benches a short time ago appealed to the house
as if he believed that 'the sky was about to fall, and he
asked, to use his own language, when the Government were
going to pull up. He could tell the hon. and learned gen-
tleman, if he talked of pulling up, that there were two who
'could play at that gang—that he would find himself pulled
up a great deal sooner than the people of England would
be when it was proposed to add 300,000, or 400,000 voters
to the'elettoral list. (Cheers from the Manchester party.)
The right hon.' gentlernan the member for Buckingham-
shire, in his speech last session, told the house—he was
then rather-wild in his statement, but the Government was
in extremis, and it wanted to get a vote or two—that he was
going to add 500,000 to the electoral list. The right hon.
gentleman /said that his proposition would double the num-
ber of the constituents of the United Kingdom. He pre-
sumed that the right hon. gentleman believed what he then
said, but ho afforded the house very little information in
regard to thoSe fancy franchises-which he proposed. He
(Mreßhigh9, however, was sure that the result of the right
hon. gentleman's calculations would disappoint himself as
well as the country. Now, the present bill proposed rather
less than that of the right hon. gentleman, but he thought
it would add' much more to the constituencies than the
measure proposed by the right hon. gentleman -would have'
done. The hon. gentleman who last addressed the house
spoke of the vast increase that would be made in certain
boroughs, and quoted certain statements which appeared in
' the Times. But they all knew that there were no persons
in the world, more capable of dealing in mares' nests than
the directore pf the Times newspaper. (Laughter.) Look
at • Liverpool, with its 80,000 houses, and only 18,000
, electors; Manchestere ,with its .70,000 houses, and 19,000
electors ; Birmingham, with its 50,000 houses and only
9,000 electors. Did hon. members suppose that those
restrictions were tolerable or would be tolerated ?
Was that a state of things they could justify by
any kind of logic, or for one moment defend without eitter-
ing a libel upon their countrymen ? He found, looking at
those returns, that the number of voters to be enfranchised
was small, and behind all their expectations. The right
hon. gentleman the member for Buckinghamshire made
several blunders in hiS figures. He first spoke of 2.57,000,
and at last brought down the number to 217,000 electors,
that would be added to the list. Take the whole of - the
number of £6 hothgeholclers and over, and deduct from them
the present number of electors in boroughs, the number
could not be more than 162,000. That number, compared
with the whole population, was ridiculous and contemptible.
Throughout the whole rof the boroughs the increase of the
franchise would nPfibe more than 40 per cent. As to the
counties, the right hon. gentleman said he could not make
' out the exact number of the electors. But what did it
signify whether there ' were 100,000 or 150,000 more or lees
electors in the counties ? Was the voter some pestilent crea-
' .tion that they wanted to put- out of existence, or a man that
they wore bound to take by the hand, and to ask to be a
participator with them in the working of the parliamentary
power of a great empire ? (Hear, hear.) Taking the whole
number of the county occupiers from £lO to £5O a year, he
thought the return showed somethinglike 400,000 occupiers;
but they should deduct from them the women occupiers, which
made one-fifth or oh -fourth of the whole number. Well, then,
deducting all those new Occupiers of £5O and upwards, and all
those who were freeholders, &c., theywould in all probability
-reduce the number of those qualified to vote below 200,000.
He thought that the right hon. gentleman the member for
Buckinghamshire list year estimated them below that num-
ber. According to hie (Mr. Bright's) calculations theywould
not add to the county franchise more than 100,000. Now,
the great blot of the bill of 1832 was its absolute exclusion of
the working classes from the: franchise, he meant those who
were paid weekly, or at. short intervals, their wages. If
they wished to maintain that system still, let them say so
behily. They often stated that there was no clamour in
favour of thish,ill foe reform. 'But only
-let the Earl of Derby
in the Hofise of Lords, or the right hon. gentleman the
member for Buckinghainsbire in the House of Commons,
declare now, as the.leeders of that same party declared 30
years ago, that' the Working classes should not be admitted
to the benefits of a measure of parliamentary referee, and he
' (Mr. Bright) undertook to say that such a whirlwind of
public opinion would be at once raised as would convince
them of the serious mistake they had made. (Hear, hear.)
Well„then, if they did not wish to exclude them from the
electoral system, let there admit them immediately. If they
consented to. admit, them, he asked how, many were they
prepared to-admit leas than this bill proposed to do ? He
thotrght-that the whole number of persons admitted- by this
bill, according to his calculation, in boroughs, would be
160,000-er 170,000. But how many of these were really
working mcfi Net more than 100,000. If that be so, he'
thought to reject the bill would be in effect to invite the
working classes to the hoUse and when they were about to
enter, to slam their door in their faces.' He need scarcely
remark that that would be a rash and a perilous proceeding.
They had much better assent to the bill of The, noble lord,
or to a more extensive measure which he advocated, than
to take any such course, as that to which he had alluded.
The right hon. gentleman and some other hon. members
d welt largely upon. this question of swamping some of the
constituencies. If they turned back to the discussions of
1832 they would find that every -argument that could be
used-was put- forward by Sir Charles Wetherell and Me.
Wilson Croker ; and they said that persons of the position
of clergymen, bankers, manufacturers, merchants, would be
overborne by the number of persons below them in position
who were admitted to the franchise. That had been said,
but he never heard of beroughs which had been absolutely
swamped in that way. Ho had represented three boroughs,
but he bad never heard a complaint from the more wealthy
classes of thoee boroughs that their influence was swamped
and overborne. Take the case of the city of Coventry,
which contained 4,300 freemen and 1,200 householders;
but they never heard complaints that the freeholders
were swamped by the householders, or that the two
members for that city represented one class of voters more
than the other, This was altogether a childish fear; there
was no foundation for it, but it was the offspring of privi-
lege and of monopoly. If they looked at the class about to
be admitted more fully to the franchise they would see that
their opinions differed as much as did the opinions of those
above:them on :almost every question of religion, of politics,
or of municipal affairs, and they were subjected to the in-
flaence of association, wealth, character, opinion, and all
those powers which directed and influenced the course of
society, and every end all the individuals who composed
society. As -to-"
to' " s traelPing " hon. gentlemen opptei to need
not cherish the fears wh:ch'they seemed to entertain. They
khew that half-a-dozen lant2.hollers might swamp a county, .
that was notorious, ; but ho ha,' never heard that in
ianlaget
sawarge
and free constituency there had beenbeeniamp the legitimate
constituency that had 'been able la h them in the
influence of any other class associefeet wit.
ls t this bill was
franchise. The other class of argument ageee.hi s part of
that it was not extensive enough. Ile found ee ,
the question infinitely more difficult toargue thegee:'e other.
That was a most rational objection. - In the boreittgn''s of
England and Wales the average number of adult men, ea-
cording to the poor law return, was about 1,750,000. Out
of these only 440,000 at present had the right of voting, and
the effect Of the present measure would be to add only
160,000 to this number, making a total of 600,000, and
therefore, in the boroughs of England and Wales only one
man in three would still be entitled to a vote. But if they
looked at the United Kingdom, they would find that there
were 6,000,000 of families, while there were only 1,000,000
voters, and if this bill were to pass there would still, at the
utmost, be Only 1,500,000 voters, which would leave
4,500,000, families, representing 22,000,000 of population,
without a vote in the election of members of Parliament.
Surely, that statement would supply consolation to the
hon. and learned gentleman (Mr. Rolt). Now this, 'as
regarded votes, seemed a mistake on the part of the house;
it indicated a distrust altogether unfounded. He
thought the character of the population would justify
the house in taking a more liberal and generous view of
them, and in proceeding much farther than the noble lord
proposed by this bill. (Hear, hear.) But viewing this bill as
only a partial act of justice, and seeing the ldrge amount of
acquiescence it obtained, he could not refuse to accept it,
although only 300,000 or 400,000 new electors would be
admitted by it to the franchise, though he should be glad
to see the number doubled. He recollected with respect to
free trade, which had only just been accomplished, that in
-1842 they had-mado a considerable step, which was repeated
in 1846 and in 1853, and at length they saw the work carried
Air towards completion, and so he believed that this addition
would give a large amount of satisfaction, but that the time
Would come when of these 22,000,000 of whom he had
spoken they have to open their doors to a large number, that
they might participate in those rights which the constitu-
tion offered to them much mere generously than that house
seemed disposed to do. With regard to the boroughs, he
should like to tell the house one or two facts—that for the
consolation of the right hon. member for Buckinghamshire,
who was sorely afflicted at what was about to take place—
having reference to the large class of poorer voters within
boroughs. With respect to them, hon. gentlemen seemed
to think that ,a great democratic step had been taken that
would materially affect the constitution of the next Parlia-
ment. Let the house look for a moment to the other side of
the picture. Let them look at the small boroughs. In the
bill which he prepared last year, and which he should have
brought before the house but for the haste of the right hon.
member for B uckinghamshire and the noble lord thme ember
for London to introduce their proposals to the house, he pro-
vided that every borough whose population was under 16,000
should only have one member, and that every borough hav-
ing a population of less than 8,000 should be disfranchised.
Tho first borough whose population was under 16,000 was
Berwick-upon-Tweed, and of the other boroughs in the same
classification there were 101 returning 106 members to Par-
liament. Let the house observe how this bill affected these
constituencies. At present the whole number of electors in
the 101 boroughs was 61,000, and the number to be added by
the bill was 17,000; the• present average constituency was
610, and the average number of new electors would be 176 ;
therefore in these 101 boroughs the bill would not add quite
30 per cent. to the existing constituencies. But to come to
the lower class of boroughs, beginning with Woodstock, of
which there were 54, returning 85 members, the present
number of electors was 22,000, the number to be added
was 5,000 ; the average number of electors was 420, air;
the average number of now voters in each would be 10
therefore, in these 54 boroughs, the bill would add to the
existing constituency less than 25 per cent. This brought
the house to the fact that these small boroughs were in such
a condition that no reform bill could help them out of a a
condition which called for the care and attention of the
house in disfranchising them and transferring their mem-
bers to larger places. If they took the 101 boroughs com-
prising Berwick-upon-Tweed and those below it, they would
find that these returned 141 members to Parliament, a num-
ber which was within nine of ono-halfof the entire borough
members of Englanal and Wales ;' and if they compared the
member of electors in these boronglis with th.e number in
the remaining boroughs, they would see how impossible it
was, notwithstanding the fears of the hon. and learned gene
' ' about to place it hi, this
tltinan,(Mr. 1Lolt)- that this question should rermiiti pe r_
mancntly whore Ley warn a
~_,n , „, ,
._,,.; e bill.
Krum t;hc rem' made to Lis i oor Law _Loan( n, appeared
there were 11 lerge buroughl3 of England anti'Wales, the
constituencies of which 'would, under the bill, amount to
262,000. In the 101 boroughs of which he had spoken, the
constituencies would amount to 79,000, but the 14 boroughs
would return only 32 members, while the 101 boroughs would
return 141 members. If they wanted to have a still more
accurate illustration, they would find that, comparing the
Tower Hamlets and Liverpool with 54 of the smallest
boroughs in England and Wales, the former, with double
the number of electors, returned only five members, whereas
the latter returned 60members to Parliament. Hon. gentle-
men opposite did not seem to give full credit to this state-
ment ; it might be that property had nothing to do with
the matter, or that men had nothing to do with it. It might
1 t4gt. " ilit'Cß§t4" 444 k 9 OM iigil Pillg#FAti9/43141M1

were to be found in great abundance in very:small boroughs,
though they were not to be found in those boroughs of
ielaichlteladThiet spoken:. Butehavineestated-thus much
about thetillehe hoped the noble lord would permit him
to show where he thought the bill_ failed in that which the
Government ought to feel themselves pledged to accom-
plibh. He maintained, and he thought hon. gentlemen
opposite would agree with him in this, that at whatever
amount the franchise were fixed, it should be so settled as
that-it would be real, without question—that it should be
mede so plain and simple that all should be able to avail
themselves of it to whom the act of Parliament professed
to 'offer it. Now, in the case of the counties, the noble lord
had inserted a proviso in his bill which was most objection-
able on several grounds. He proposed to apply to county
electors enfranchised by the bill the ratepaying clauses,
which had given so much trouble in the boroughs. In the
case of occupancies above £5O the ratepaying clauses were
not to apply; but they were to be made applicable for occu-
pancies between 150 and £lO. Ho objected to that distinc-
tion as tending to encumber and embarrass the cuunty
franchise, and he hoped that when they went into com-
mittee that portion of the bill would be amended. Then,
further, as to the question of that occupancy in counties, it
was provided that if the land were not held along with the
house there should be a building of the annual value of not
less than £5, but if it were held with the house there was
no specified•value to fix the character and condition of the
house—the object being to prevent persons from letting a
field to somebody who might build upon it a hut, and claim
the right of voting in respect of it. He thought that with
respect to this county occupancy, the noble lord should pro-
vide that no person should have a vote, unlrss the building
or house in respect of which lao claimed should be of the
annual value of £6. The noble lord did not propose that
in boroughs they should go below a £6 rental—why, then,
should they go below it in counties ? If they allowed a
man in a county to have a vote for a house of £3, £l, or £5
value, which he made up into a £lO occupancy by holding
two or three fields, this would introduce into the county
constituencies a much lower class of electors than those who
lived in £6 houses in the towns ; and this objection would
apply with still greater force in the case of Scotland than of
England: If such a provision were introduced into the
Scotch bill it would introduce to the franchise a class of
persons who were probably the most dependent of any in
tthe United Kingdom. There was another question to
which public attention out of doors had been directed—the
payment of rates. He should like to ask the noble lord
why, in giving the franchise of £6 and £lO, they should not
let it be sufficient that a man should be on the rate-book and
rated, so that his name should be transferred to the elec-
toral list without its being necessary to prove that on the
20th of July he or some one else had paid the rates that
were due on the sth of January ? In the borough in which
he lived this peculiarity had very little result—the embar-
rassment was inconsiderable, and therefore he would not
speak of it ; but he had seen in boroughs great perplexity
and embarrassment to arise from it.. • From what had taken
place, especially in the metropolitan boroughs and others,
that condition which was of no avail in making our con-
stituencies more select, was a condition of great embarrass-
nient. It often put men off the list, not, perhaps, the
pOorest, but those who had not paid their rates, and it was
one of those irritations which every elector seemed to think
a rather shabby contrivance to deprive him of whateParlia-
ment professed to give him. There was one other Point in
which the bill was not intended to be defective—namely,
that of compound householders. In 1850 Sir W. Clay
pissed,a bill through the house to facilitate the claims of
persons whose rates were compounded for by the landlord.
He (Mr. Bright) proposed a clause, which was inserted on
the third reading, in order to meet this anomaly, and by
which the tenants were enfranchised. It was held that
if the landlord paid the rate of the tenant, or com-
pounded for it at 75 per cent., and the parish au-
thorities agreed to receive it, that that was not
payment of the full rate according to the Reform Act, and
all these• tenants were disfranchised, and in Manchester
4,000 were placed on the register in the succeeding year by
the operation of that clause. It had not been acted on, per-
haps from its not being known, in many other boroughs,
bAt the overseers, like all officials who did not want to give
theinSelves unnecessary tronb'se, disobeying the law, for he
believed there was no penalty for neglect, refused in the ma-
jority of cases to put any one's imam e on the register notpay-
ing rates. They put the landlord on e-ho paid the rates, but
the tenant's nem. was not entered, anti be was accordingly
disfranchised. By the clause ho insisted that all tenants'
names should be on the rate book, and that then if their
rates were paid, the tenant's name would And its way by a
regular process on to the rate book and the register, and
tblese persons would not be altogether disfranchised as
hitherto. If that lien not done, this extension et the fran-
chise, limited altogether to a great number of boroughs,
would be nothing but a delusion, and when you made sip the
electoral roll, you would find the constituencies to be ox-
eddy what they were on the past. He would say nothins
about the question that would have to be discussed on the
motion. of the hon.. member,
,for Bristol beyond this. Let
hon. members not deceive themselves because the noble lord
with an adherence to consistency which was sometimes ad
mired, but in this case much to be deplored, had abstained
filen giving the ballot in this bill : that question was one
nevertheless which was alreedy at the door, and one which
'they would have to consider iL a short time. He spoke
now of those.boroughs in which the great constituencies
were to be made greater. Some of these boroughs were
much in the position of the counties, excepting that the
rich men in • the &enter had factories, ant; the rich men in
the latter large landed estates. He could conceive that in
these boroughs in the north and in the soutie of England
political feeling would run very high, and that ere would
be the greatest possible effort to win on one side and the other
and that great numbers of men now about to be en-
franchised--as had been the case where a great number
had already been enfranchised—would find their liberty
crippled by the fierce political contention of the rich and
i powerful n those constituencies and towns. lie believed
they would find themselves driven, if they were not now
almost driven, to their very wits' end, how to put an end to
coercion and corruption in our constituencies. He believed
that when this bill passed they would have a greater necese
sity for that measure, and that they would have, as he be •
aast tah
redemption hands Parliament.
theiampelne
dt.g
eNgoiwv, if theysupported
the
which the noble viscount willinglyen
noble
lord, t he
and
bill
accepted when he took
(Ace, they had a right to call u keep
faith on the Government to
faith with them. When he saw men in that house who,
really wanted some honest, if it were not an extensive,
measure of reform, and the thousands sad millions not in
that house who were anxious es to the result that it might
come to ; if the house was for reform let it be done, and he
would ask the hon. and learned gentleman whether he
thought that, if it was rejected by the house that it would
again come before the house in a milder form ? The right
hon. gentleman, the leader of the Opposition, both in that
and the other house, had had one trial. Did they Ada
them to have another ? Was it desirable that they shThild
submit to what he called something like humiliation in
haying it put upon them to try to make an adjustment
of the question. Was it not better to leave it in the hands
of the noble lord the member for the City of London, who
hed no very strong democratic feeling, who looked with
veneration to the throne, and no doubt with affection to the
order of which he was so distinguishedmember. Could
a
they not leave the matter in his hands ? He had given to
it many times moreconsideration and examination than the
great bulk of the hon. gentlemen opposite, and if he were
one of them—fearful of such changes and wishful to go with
gentle footsteps and not far—he should say the noble lord
in this me %sure brought forward a bill, which had considering
the circumstances of the-country and the wishes of the people,
it was not only their duty, but their obvious and pressing
'interest to accept, and would give them, without any re-
_ --iction, suclechenges as might be suggested, which might
s'
na-i- it more acceptable to the people, and more beneficial
to 'the 'entry. Were not the people qualified ? The hon,
.aidin America they had a population so edu-
gentlemale e. could never hope the people of this country
toted that pen • nositi -
on, or at least exceed it ; but it was
could reach toten have lived among the people for the
impossible for men lo _
,it knowing to the contrary. The
last 20 or 30 years wit tee ember for Bucks probably did
right hon. gentleman the :n ~'e down at his delightful ma -
not know much' about the peep. Buckinghamshire, and
nor, where he spent the recese
king of between Gros-
saiv little of the classes they were sem. but he (Mr. Bright)
venor-gate and the 'House of Commons;
"1 Lancashire,;
lived among them when for six months dcee.
1.
and knew something of what they were. 2.
'le other day,
when at Manchester, he visited the manufactory of Messrs.
S. and J. Watts, the most magnificent establiskne ent per-
haps in the kingdom. He went through the spacious.-or
and saw the articles of manufacture collected from all •
looms and manufactories in the kingdom, in all their amaz-
ing' stock, amazing variety, and amazing beauty; and when
they had finished their survey he said, "Is it not an amaz-
ing and an astonishing.thing for contemplation that proba-
bly if we could bring every man whose hand and skill pro-
dived these wonderful assortment of goods, there is not one
man in 50 of the whole of them, that by the law of the coun-
tryt was permitted to vote for a member me Parliament."
(Laughter, 'cheers, and ironical cheers.) Iron. 33191,,,
might cheer, but these were men who were fit for 861201,11.4'
else than to be rated and taxed, and if the 'spirit the ee-ion,
gentleman exhibited when he laughed at the statement had
been displayed when he sat on that side of the house, he
would tell him that,he was taking an infinitely more dan-
gerous course that ke was taking in connection with any
Proposition on. that subject that he could make. (Oh, oh,
and ironical cheers.) No doubt the hon. gentleman, if
he
spoke, would tell them that the people did not want this
measure. He would tell them that there was no
turbulence. He admitted there was no turbulence, but
there was something more than that. He had seen, and the
house had witnessed a storm at sea. It was a very grand
and impressive spectacle, and sometimes it was very appall-
ing ; but there was something not less grand and striking
in the contemplation of the calm and majestic advancing of
the tide. The turbulence and passion of 1842 were hap-
pily not present with us now, and nobody rejoiced more than
he did that they could discuss this cliestion under circum-
stances very different to the bill of 1832. There was no
howling wind, no imminent convulsion, no turbulent storm;
but there was existing in its place the calm, the steady, and
irgisistible tide of great public opinion • there was the con-
sciousness amongst the millions of our countrymen that
Parliament did not adequately represent them—that, in
fact, it was not just to them ; and silently, but surely and
inevitably, this opinion was marching on to its triumph.
Tho very footpath on which gentlemen on this bench trod
not a long time ago was now swept away, and the stand
point that they occupied not lon since upony' this question
had been submerged, and was•andask
them not to resist this growing gone , he would
concession even so small thatb gathering opinion by a
this bill to give, and if as which it was the object of
B°'they would show t hthey had
a generous confidence in theiras
be-
lieved and had faith in countrymen ; that they
and that it really the constitution of their country;
meant the representation of the people ;
and they would show farther, what he hoped they kid
evidence by all their votes on this bill, that they w
ing that the institutions were will-
they boasted so much of and prc-
fessed to love so much, should repose in the good-will and
in the intelligence and virtue of their fellow countrymen.

Mr. KNIGHTLEY said the hon. member for Birming-
ham had spoken about the marrow of reform. For his own
port, he wondered he did not say, " Go I get thee gone :
thy bones are marrowless 1" The great evil in our pre-

sent representation was that the large constituencies were
scarcely better represented than the smaller towns.
The west riding of York, for instance, with a con-
stituency of 33,000, had only two members, and there
is ere other examples that might be adduced. How did the
bill propose to deal With these anomalies ? Lord Derby's

Government proposed a bill which was open to some of
these objections, and he (Mr. Knightley) expressed his dis-
approbation of those portions of that measure, and there-
fore he was perfectly consistent in objecting to the present
bill. The bill of 1852 proposed to extend the area of these
boroughs by incorporating other places with them ; the bill
of 1854 disfranchised many of them, and the bill of Lord
FOerby's Government, while it did not disfranchise, yet in-
troduced a considerable modification. But this present bill
did not disfranchise. If they kept continually altering their
iiolicy in this matter they might eventually find themselves
ih the position described in the old epitaph—" I was well ;
I wanted to be better, I took p_hysic, and I died." (A laugh.)
TUOY TiVrc t 934 OM Tin 141 IvaimAl Pa wo

for all evils, but who was it that required the ballot ? The

farmers did not ask for it.

--"No, lot the galled jade wince, _
Our withers are unwrung."
It was in large towns that,-writhing under th^ influence
brought to bear, they called for_the.ballot,
Mr. STANSFELD rose amidst loud cries of "adjourn"
is address the house.
Lord PALMERSTON said if the debate were now ad- •
journed he trusted it would be resumed at an early hour-
to-morrow. • [11)
_ _

Tho SPEAKER then put the question of adjournment -
to the house, and it was agreed to without a division.
The debate was accordingly adjourned till to-morrow.
Mr. DISRAELI said that as the hon. member for Bristol =
had a motion on the paper with regard to the question of the,
ballot, and as that was in some measure connected withthe
question of parliamentary reform, it would be convenient to
both sides of the house to know whether a diseus.ion upon
that question would be introduceu in the debate, or whether
the hon. member would postpone his motion.
Mr. H. BERKELEY said, as he considered-hit bill to be,
the better of the two he intended to proceed with it. (Hear,. ,
hear, and laughter.)
SUPPLY.—VOTE FOR CHINESE EXPEDITION:
(£850,000.)
_ _

On the report of the committee of supply,
General PEEL drew attention to the vote for £850,000 fo, •
the expedition to China, which he declared was not hab
sufficient to meet the amount that would be required. lit
believed that these estimates, taken in connection with the
other measures of the Government, would leave them with L
'an enormous deficit at the end of the next financial year.
Mr. S. HERBERT defended the vote, and said that un,
less the East India Company failed in making good their
payments, the sum proposed to be taken would be adequa bs
to cover all the expenditure.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY was disposed to regard the joint
expedition of England and France to China with great
alarm. In his opinion it would be so much money thrown
away, from which no advantage whatever would accrue to
this country.
Sir J. ELPHINSTONE said that the reported streng,thi.
of the expedition to China was quite sufficient to justify th e
apprehension that had been felt as to a deficiency next
.yetair..
He feared that if the war were prosecuted upon the seal e
contemplated that deficiency would be not less than
£15,000,000.
Sir C. WOOD explained that the vote of £850,000 Ina
to make good the deficiency for the current financial yeaz
ending the 31st inst. It was impossible to conjecture wlat
might be the expenditure for 1860-61.
The report was then agreed to.
WAYS AND MEANS.
The house then went into committee of ways and means,
and the resolutions were ordered to be reported.