The Sun.
London, England, 1860-03-02 00:00:00

speech. We hear mono of the Reformers from Birmingham,
and elsewhere coming forward with the schemes about
which they have been agitating the country, and which cer-

. _ . • _ _
tainly go far beyand that of the noble lord. Twenty-eight
years have elapsed since the passing of the Refor.-n Bill, and
when the noble lord abandoned the doctrine of finality to
which he so obstinately clung, I think we had reason to ex

pect an extension of the franchise which would have con-
ferred electoral privileges on the working classed generally.
What has happened within the last few years ? In 1852 the
noble lord brought in a bad Bill, to which nobody listened.
In 1854 he brought is another Bill, which was ten times

better than the one he had just submitted. The noble lord
therefore, is not so good a Reformer now as he was six
years ago. (" Hear, hear," and laughter.) The Bill of 1854
proposed wholly to disfranchise 19 rotten and nomination
boroughs, and it also took one member from 33 other bo-
roughs. (Hear, hear.) We have now a mild measure, by
which one member is taken from 25 boroughs, and not a
single word is said about disfranchisement. (Hear.) Caine
and other pocket boroughs are not •
Included in the scheme,
and yet formerly the noble lord's principles were that as
long as nomination boroughs existed the seeds of a further
and a necessary reform would remain sown. (Hear, hear.)
Will not nomination boroughs be left after the passing of
this Bill? Of course they will, and the noble lord's object
mast therefore be to have the question of Reform mooted
every session in this House. (Hear, hear.) We want a
lodger franchise. (Hear, hear.) It is totally impossible
that a Bill which adds only 200,000 voters to the borough
constituencies can satisfy the working classes of this coun-
try. (Hear, hear.) What was the promise—l will say the
compact—made with these men in 1831-2 ? They were dis-
appointed then because they were excluded from the fran-
chise, and they were told, "Keep quiet; your time will
come, and we shall then give votes to the working classes."
Depending on this promise, they rallied round the Reformers
of 1831-2 for " the Bill, the whole Bill, and nothing but the
Bill," and have been waiting patiently ever since for some-
thing to be done in their behalf. Bat what will this Fill
‘do for them? I remember that Lord Althorp, who was then
the leader of this House, being present at a dinner
given by Sir Francis Burdett on the introduction of
the Reform Bill, said, "To tell you the truth, I think
this Bill but a very poor concern—(laughter)—and
the only thing which makes me regard it more favourably
is that when the bill was settled by the Cabinet we sent a
copy of it to Lord John Russell and Lord Stanley" (now
Lord Derby), who were not then members of the Cabinet.
(Lord John Russell was understood to make a gesture of
dissent.] Does the noble lord mean to say he was a mem-
ber of the Cabinet ? (Laughter.) I don't know whether
my right hon. friend (Mr. E. Ellice) was not there, and if
so he will remember the circumstance. "The only thing,"
added Lord Althorp, "which gives me hopes of the bill is
that when Stanley saw it he wrote to me and said, ' What
a pretty kick-up you are going to make 1"' (Laughter.)
And when he heard that, Lord Althorp did think some-
thing of the bill. Mr. Stanley was quite right ; there was
a pretty kick-up. We had 100,000 men threatening us from
Birmingham ; there was a run upon the bank for gold ;
there were fires in different parts of the country; a black
flag was hoisted from the steeples of the Glasgow churches;
and, amid these scenes, the measure was carried. There
will be no kicking against this bill, I am sure. (Laughter.)
Then, I ask, is this intended to be final, or are we to in-
troduce improvements in it in a few years ? There is cer-
tainly one great blemish in it. Not one word has been said
by the noble lord about registration. One great complaint
now is the difficulty of registration. (Hear, hear.) The
noble lord said the payment of poor.rates is to be the con-
dition of registration, but I say that the payment of no rate
or tax ought to be a condition of registration. (Hear,
hear.) Why, at present it sometimes takes two years be-
fore a man can get on the register, and I say we ought to
have a registration every quarter. (Hear, hear.) As to the
proposed redistribution of seats, it is impossible to call
that anything like a reform. Another blemish in this
scheme is, that no notice is taken of lodgers. There
are men paying £lO or £l5 a-year rent, but living in lodg-
ings ; they have, and are to have, no vote ; these men are
respectable mechanics, and educated men, who are quite fit
for the franchise. In the metropolis you cannot find such a
thing as a£6 house. A house of £2O or £3O is occupied by
two or three families, and the head of each of them requires
to have the franchise. If you do not give it to them, they
will be discontented, and agitation will go on from year to
year. What the decision of Parliament will be as to this
measure I cannot say, but I am sure, whether it be its adop-
tion or rejection, it will be a matter of perfect indifference
to the great body of the people.
Mr. SLANEY thought the bill would be hailed by all
thinking men as a very great boon to the people of England.
Mr. KNIGHTLEY asked whether the noble lord could
state the maximum number of electors that would be added
to the county constituencies ?
Lord J. RUSSELL—In reply to the question of the
right hon. member for Cambridge University (Mr. Wal-
pole), 1 have to say that we do not propose any alteration as
to poor-rates, but the tenant will be obliged to pay them as
at present, and have the same facilities for placing himself
on the register as at present. In answer to the question
just asked, I do not think we should be justified in saying
what would be the number of £lO voters in counties. We
have returns, but only of those rated between £lO and £5O,
which show a total of 381,000 in England, and 415,000 in
England and Wales, but I do not think that is quite accu-
rate, because it comprehends all freeholders who are rated
at £lO and upwards. An hon. gentleman has asked whe-
ther the passing of this measure would render necessary a
dissolution of Parliament.
Major EDWARDS—This year.
Lord J. RUSSELL—What the bill proposes is, that
the November registration claims shall be made under the
franchises conferred by this measure. When the registra-
tion is complete, it will be competent, of course, for the
Crown to dissolve the present Parliament, and to summon a

new one.
Mr. BRIGHT, in consequence of what had just fallen
from the noble lord, wished to know whether any change
was intended in respect of the Compound Householders Act
passed a few years since ? That act gave the franchise to the
tenant, whose landlord paid the rates, and he wished to know
whether it would be applicable to those who would be enfran-
chised under this bill.
Lord J. RUSSELL—WI propose to make no change at
all.

Mr. BRIGHT thought the noble lord had said there
would be a change. He hoped he had been mistaken, for a
departure from the present arrangement in that respect
would falsify all the promises that had been held out.
Mr. ROEBUCK remarked that among the towns which
were to receive an additional member each was Leeds, but
not Sheffield. (A laugh). He only wished to call the noble
lord's attention to the fact that Sheffield had at present a
larger constituency than Leeds. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. CON INGHAM viewed with alarm one striking cha-
racteristic of the bill, and that was the redistiibution of the
seats to be taken away. He entertained grave doubts whe-
ther the Liberal party would gain by the transfer of mem-
bers from small boroughs to counties.
Leave was then given to introduce the bill.
THE REFORM BILL FOR IRELAND.

- _
Mr. CARDWELL—I rise, Sir, to state the nature of the
changes which the Government propose to make with regard
to the Parliamentary representation of Ireland. I shall do
so with great brevity, and I shall notenter into questions of
argument, but state as shortly and as well as I can the effect
which those changes will have on the constituency of Ireland.
Although we adopt the same views for Ireland which my
noble friend has laid down for England, the house is well
aware that the law whichregulates the qualification of elec-
tors in Ireland is framed on a different model from that of
Great Britain. The act pasq)d in 1850, which put an end
to many controversies of long standing, and which has
given, I believe, general satisfaction in its working, is the
basis of the law which is intended to operate in Ireland ;
and that tenement valuation, which is now making progress
towards completion, it is proposed to apply to the consti-
tuency in Ireland ; since Ireland enjoys, in that respect, an
advantage which Great Britain does not enjoy, giving her
freedom from thvwoasbleuoaleti
oonf . hlev
s
h awhichWhat
kingdomi t s waponruol
pdo
uniform,
found
td
o inin
applying
clear,
o
andintelltigoitbhlee
fixeslr el a ntdb
ei sqtno change a
lificetio
nt he
in
counties provisiono
at of hxtl2e, actan do ft
to substitute
which
for it £lO, and in boroughs to change the qualification of
8 and substitute for it £6. That change being proposed,
illomsed,
we should be desirous to know what effect that change
produce on the county and on the borough constituencies.
At present, in Ireland, upon the past registration, the coun-
ties collectively have a constituency of 174,000. If we were
to add to that constituency all those who are on the rate-
books at from £l2 to £lO, the total addition, I think, would be
40,126. But ifyou apply to that the correction which I think
will be found to be a right and necessary correction, for the
purpose of deducting the females, minors, double occupa-
tions, abAences, and other cases, so as to bring tho number
of ratepayers down to the number at which the constituency
will be, you will then have an increase of 30,000, making
on the whole, therefore, a constituency of 204,000. Then
with regard to the boroughs, adopting the same rule, yo u
have in the present boroughs a constituency of 30,700, and
the first addition of ratepayers would be 7,557; but making
the corresponding correction of the returns, the number
would be 6,655, making up a total in the present counties
and boroughs of 240,000. That is the way in which tLe

£lO and £6 franchises will operate in boroughs and coun-
ties. On this part of the subject there is a change of no
great magnitude, perhaps, which the Government think it
right to make in the borough franchises. At the time of the
Reform Bill there was a different law applicable to freemen
in England and Ireland, and it is proposed that the law re-
garding freemen in this country shall come into operation
in Ireland. With regard to any change in the different

constituencies of Ireland I will now explain the views of the
Government. Ireland is a country not generally inhabited
in large towns. A much smaller proportion of the whole
population of Ireland reside in towns than if you take Eng-
land or Scotland. At present 32 Irish counties return 64
members, 33 boroughs return 39 members, and one univ,:r-
sity returns two members, giving a total of 105 members.
Now, applying to Ireland therule whichhas been laid down
with re&ard to England namely, that no town with less
that 7,000 inhabitants shall return two members to this
house, you will not find in Ireland a single borough to dis-
franchise. There is not in Ireland a single borough return-
ing two members whose population falls very much short
of 30,000. I think Wexford, which is the smallest, at the
last census had a population very nearly approaching 29,000.
There are therefore no means of obtainin., additional seats
to dispose of by applying to Ireland the
tile that has been