The Sun.
London, England, 1860-04-23 00:00:00

THE REFORM BILL.

Mr. B. OSBORNE asked the hon. member for Salford
whether it was his intention to press his motion in respect
to the Reform Bill being referred to a select committee ?

Mr. MASSEY said that as it was considered that his
motion would have the effect of obstructing, if not negativ-
ing, the Reform Bill, and as he had no such intention, he
would not press his motion. (Hear, hear, and Oh, oh.)
THE ADJOURNED DEBATE.

Mr. E. JAMES resumed the adjourned debate on the
second reading of this bill. He contended that the argu-
ments against the Reform Bill of the Government were
untenable, and that if the Opposition were sincere in their
hostility to that bill, the more straightforward course for
them to have adopted was to have met it with a direct
negative, instead of meeting it by an insidious opposition.
(Hear, hear.) Though he approved of much ihich the
measure contained, still it was open to very serious objec-
tion. In the first place, it did not go 'to the .necessaa y
length of disfranchising and enfranchising, which latter
was a result of the former. Besides, it did not confer the
lodger franchise, and that franchise, he believed, considering
the intelligence and position of the class in question, was
most desirable, and that their admission to the electoral
role was really necessary in order to counteract the demo-
cratic element that would be introduced into the national
constituency by the operation of this bill. He objected
also to the principle adopted in the bill with reference to
the basis of assessment as a ground for the franchise. He
believed that the Government were not aware of the extent
to which the bill would confer the franchise. (Opposition
cheers.) He was not one of those who had any appre-
hension of danger to result from the extension of the Mtn-
chise to the working classes ; on the contrary, he believed
that the introduction of these classes would tend to conso-
lidate all that was valuable in the constitution of the coun-
try, He argued that the basis of the poor-law rating for
the possession of the franchise was utterly fallacious. The
lion, member stated that he had been in communication with
vestry clerks and other persons competent to give informa-
tion in reference to the assessment of persons in the metro-
polis, as well as in 'provincial boroughs, and the result
was that there was not the slightest doubt that
the basis to which he alluded was completely absurd.
The mistake committed by the Government was that
instead of getting the na:nes of parties assessed to the taxes,
to found data, they should have obtained the number of the
houses in the United Kingdom which were charged with
assessed taxes. That would have afforded a clear and inter-
legible basis upon which to found a Reform Bill, -He
considered that this bill unsettled many things, and settled
nothing. Shear, hear.) He accused the Government of
being deficient in that boldness and courage which were
necessary to- deal with a question of such magnitude as-the
present, and contended that the bill introduced by the noble
lord (Lord J. Russell) in Mt was far superior to the pre-
sent measure. The former bill proposed to disfranchise 19
boroughs, and placed at the disposal of the Government no
less than 63 seats. That bill proceeded upon the sound
principle of taking into account population as well as elec-
tors. He protested that on going through the list of places
to be deprived of one member and others who were to receive
additional members, he could not understand the logical
principle on which the Government proceeded in the fram-
ing of the measure. Having adverted to the evils that
existed under the system of close boroughs, he denied that
Lord Macaulay could be adduced, as hon. members on the
other side of the house had attempted to do, in favour of that
system, and quoted from a speech of the noble and learned
lord in support of his position. Ho considered the bill of the
right hon. gentleman (Mr. Disraeli) was preferable to-this
of the noble lord the member for London, because it contained
the most invaluable element, the lodger franchise. In refer-
ence to that franchise he had receives letters from persons in
the most respectable positions in society, stating that for a
number of years they had paid as much as £5O a year for
lodgin,s,,s, and yet they were not considered eligible for the
exercise of a political right enjoyed by persons who paid
only £6 a year rent, and who derived their subsistence from
a very humble calling. He gave the noble lord the Foreign
Secretary credit for sincerity in reference to the question of
reform, but he maintained that the present bill was a
total failure, and that Government had lost a most favour-
able opportunity for settling satisfactorily for a quarter of a
century the important question of Parliamentary Reform.
(Hear, hear.) He asserted that the Government should
have aken a bold position in regard to this bill, and he
trusted that when the measure passed into committee
it would undergo such alterati nix as would adapt it to
the requirements and progress of the community at large.
(Hear, hear.)
Mr. HARDY strongly denounced the arguments
in favour of the bill, which he contended • re •
ceived the cordial support of nobody either in
or out of the house, and at the utmost obtained only the
qualified approval of those who had spoken in favour of its
provisions. He assailed very strongly the arguments used
by the hon. member for Birmingham (Mr. Bright) in his
speech on this bill, and was
(LEFT SPEAKING.) • ..,