The Sun.
London, England, 1860-06-08 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING,' JUNE 8, 1860.

those who were in the army and navy, and for those who
were incapacitated from pauperism or crime, that there
were 6,000,000 of men to whom parliament had not con-
ceded the right of suffrage. Now, the bill of the noble
lord proposed to make a slight advance—it reposed to
open the door to, it might be, 300,000, and o:'' a very ex-
treme calculation 400,000, throughout the United King-
dom. Ho believed it would be 300,000, -nd believed it
would not be 400,000. Well, if it were 3 r eOOO it was only
i opening the door so far, that 1 in 20 of those now excluded
' would be allowed to come in. Did they think that any-
body could believe that the terror and alarm they had ex-
pressed were well founded ? It was utterly impossible. He
did not believe that any man in the house or out of it who was
told that 1 in 20 of these persons was admitted to vote could
honestly say that that was a measure perilous to the country
or to the constitution in any sense. He thought he might
take that to be almost agreed on. There were some things
which had been asserted, and he wished to allude to one or
two of them. It had been asserted during this discussion,
over and over again, that the admissionof this number, and
therefore, he might almost say of any number of men over
the 1,000,000 was to give up the representation of the
country and the power of Parliament to classes altogether
unworthy of it ; and if he might adopt the language of the
right hon. gentleman the member for Hertfordshire, which
he employed in one of the most eloquent and elaborate
speeches ever heard in that house—a speech of which every
word had been considered over and over, and therefore, it
was not delivered off-hand in the heat of debate—in that
speech it was asserted that to open the door to 1 in 20 it was
to hand over the Parliamentary government and power of the
United Kingdom to what he designated as poverty and pas-
sion. He could not allow himself to speak of that phrase of the
right hon. gentleman in language which constantly came to
his lips when he spoke of it. But the noble lord the mem-
leer for the city the other night quoted from an article in a
periodical which was assumed to represent hon. gentlemen
opposite. He was rather surprised to find the-right hon.
gentleman the member for Buckinghamshire appeared to
take some offence at it, for he (Mr. Bright) believed that
the noble lord honestly thought that it was most friendly
and most complimentary to him. Such he (Mr. Bright)
understood to be the tenor of the observation. It was said
—he knew not with what truth—that that article was
written by the noble lord opposite (Lord R. Cecil). He be-
lieved the authorship...was first indicated by the tone of
the noble lord with regard to the general policy of the
right hon. gentleman. In that article he understood the
author to say this, that the course of policy they were
now using—that the result of such a measure as this would
leave the Government of the country the blessed choice
between debauchery and crime. He i eferred to the public
houses. Now as the publichouses at this moment were 10
per cent. of the whole number of houses, seeing that as they
were all now admitted to the franchise if this bill passed,
and half as many electors as now were admitted, it was
clear that the proportion of publichouses would be reduced
from 10 per cent. to 5 per cent. Now he would ask the
house to consider those three statements—the one made
by the right hon. member for Hertfordshire (Sir E. Lytton)
another assumed to be made by the noble lord, and the
statement of the right hon. gentlemad, that there, was
danger that persons admitted to the franchise would combine
and conspire against all the institutions of the country. Now
he would ask, what did that argument lead them to. Why,
it led them to this, that six-sevenths—that six millions of
seven—of the grown men of the United Kingdom are suffer-
ing and passionate, according to the arguments of the
right hon. baronet the member for Hertfordshire. They are
sunk in debauchery and crime—that was the argument of
the Quarterly Reviev ; and that they are ready to combine
against all the existing institutions of the country, and
against all the classes above them, was the prime and
sole argument of the long speech of the right
hon. gentleman the leader of gentlemen opposite.
Well, if that were the case, he (Mr. Bright) was free to
confess that he should despair of the future of this coun-
try ; but he would undertake to show that house that the tes-
timony was not worth the slightest credit. He would under-
take to say that he knew a great deal more of the working
classes, and especially of those in the north of England, to
whom this bill would more especially refer, than the right
hon. baronet the member for Hertfordshire, the right hon.
gentleman the member for Bnckinghamshire, or the author
of the article in the Quarterly Review. Excepting the
many sessions in which he had the honour—it might be
honour—but certainly the ill fortune to spend in that house,
he had for thirty years at least been in daily communication
with those classes—he had lived amongst them ; many of
them were his play mates when he was a boy ; he had super-
intended their labour, and had paid their wages. He had had
as great an opportunity as any man in that house of knowing
what were the opinions and wishes with regard to those
great political questions which that house had to discuss.
(Hear, hear.) At that moment they had a season
which was not very favourable. They had very cold
weather for the month of June, the rain fell incessantly,
and if that inclemency continued throughout the month,
the cycle of good harvests would be at an end, and they
would come to the time of two or three bad harvests. Let
them further conceive, not a war—hon. gentlemen opposite
always seemed trading in war—he supposed some political
party policy was to be carried out in the fear of war. It
ewes not so much war on the Continent that they had to
fear as insurrection and reyolution, and insurrection and
revolution abroad lighted up the fire of great excitement in
England—(hear)--and it could not be avoided as long as
men were men, and had the sympathies of men. Why,
there was the noble lord (Lord Elcho) who sometimes sat
below him—he (Mr. Bright) did not know where he then
sat—he supposed he was with the volunteers. (Laughter.)
What did the noble lord say, addressing those gentlemen
who were to defend the country against an imaginary foe.
He talked about the lion-hearted Garibaldi ; and he said,
"he goes to snap the chains which bind the Sicilians."
He (Mr. Bright) did not object to the phraseology; but
when they found a man who had never said a syllable about
giving a vote to one of his countrymen, expressing this
enthusiasm for the achievements of e Garibaldi and the
liberation of Sicily, what must be the effect of those events
abroad upon the great mass of their countrymen, who were
supposed not to be under so much mental control as the
noble lord or other members of that house ? He (Mr. Bright)
said then that the time might come when their rashness
would give way to terror, and the accusations they had
brought against the working classes might be thought un-
safe, and something like flattery might take their place.
Now, he did not say that would come in the least. Where-
ever there had been a public meeting held since this
moderate proposition was brought into the house—
meetings of which they were quite ignorant, if they
only read the Times—(loud laughter)—they would find
that there had been expressed at those meetings a great
feeling of satisfaction and a strong wish that Parlia-
ment should pass the bill during the present session.
Would hon. gentlemen opposite refuse their sanction to a
measure in which there was nothing perillous, but every-
thing moderate and constitutional. If hon. gentlemen oppo-
site were disposed to refuse this bill, they did not refuse it
in a manly way. If the bill were refused the people of this
country who were most affected by its provision, would say
that they had been treeted with distrust, and that some hon.
members had used language towards them as if they had
acted in a maener to ho deplored rather • than applauded.
The right hon. baronet the member for Hertfordshire, in
one of his works pub]. shed some time ago, said, " Who
knows the greatness of the generosity of the people of Eng-
land ?" and he did that which he (Mr. Bright) would not
do, he excluded from that phrase the nobility,who were the
Government of the country. He (Mr. Bright) said that
the people were generous and industrious, and in their in-
dustry he saw the wealth and greatness of the upper classes.
(Hear.) He was not less the friend of the upper classes
than of the working classes when he implored them with
all the power which he could put into words to pass this
bill, and to treat their countrymen with generosity and with
justice. (Cheers.)
Sir 11. CAIRNS said there were few subjects which the
hon. gentleman the member for Birmingham was not per-
fectly acquainted with, and with that before the house he
was eminently so. But he had not touched upon the real
question before the house. There was only ono reason why
he would not rather make a speech on the subject before the
house. (Oh, oh.) The hon. gentleman the member for Bir-
mingham made a speech against the third reading of the
bill before the house. He thought it possible he might not
have an opportunity of making a speech upon the third
reading of the bill, and he took advantage of the present oc-
casion to make that speech now. He would not now consi-
der whether there would be a third reading of the bill ; but
he would proceed to make a few observations on the question
which was really before the house. The question which had
been before the house was for the amendment of the repre-
sentation of the people. That was the question ; but on
Monday night the noble lord, on the part of the Govern-
ment, said the question before the house was not the
representation of the people generally, but simply the
representation of the people of England, as the two bills for
Ireland and Scotland were to be postponed. (Hear, hear.)
Now he wished to make some observations upon the ques-
tion of order. Upon the question of going into committee
on the bill before the house there were several notices on the
paper with respect to instructions to be given to the com-
mittee, and these instructions had reletion to various altera-
tions affecting not only the English, but the Irish and
Scotch bills also. The noble lord opposed the reception of
those instructions, on the ground that they applied to the
whole of the United Kingdom, whereas the bills of Ireland
and Scotland were not before the house.
Lord J. RUSSELL dissented, and was understood to say
that the Speaker had decided aginst these instructions on
the ground of their irregularity.
Sir 11. CAIRNS said he heard the noble lord himself say,
after the Speaker had decided against the instructions on
the ground of their irregularity, and after the hon. gentle-
man had proposed to amend his instruction which he was
moving by inserting the words " United Kingdom," that
these words were a greater irregularity, because the bill
before the house related to England only, whereas the pro-
posed resolution extended to the United Kingdom. (Hear,
hear.) The house bowed to the decision of the right hon.
I gentleman in the chair, but what he wished to know was
this, was it right in the noble lord to hear that decision, and
then wait until his hon. friend had made the alteration in
question before he came forward to object to that alteration,
by describing
irondeeseri thebing it as a further irregularity, because it could
not apply to the bill before the house? (Hear, hear.) So
question of order. He would now refer to the

lation until the r eslJ'sts of the census of next year were as-
certained, and t'ay.s by a caprice which had been by no
means unusual 41- tlea course of that debate, they were met
on the motion for: 'going into committee, by an amendment
the evident i•J'eention of which was to defeat the bill
altogether. (Hoar, hear.) The honourable and gal-
lant baron 4 however, the member for Ayrshire, ceuld not
be contevat with that. It would have met his views if the
Engli eh bill had been withdrawn, but nothing would satisfy
him but the indefinite adjournment of the debate itself.
Wel with regard to the withdrawal of the two bills, did
Callon. gentleman doubt that if he and other hon. gentle
mien would help them to go into committe, and to consider
Ithere the details of the English bill, it would be possible to
pass it ? (Cheers and laughter from the Opposition.) The
Irish and Scotch bills were withdrawn because, simply,
there was no time to pass them. And why was there no
time? That was a question he did not stop to answer.
(Derisive laughter from the Opposition.) Well, they were
told at the same time that there was no enthusiasm in
favour of this bill among the people. (Cheers froM the
Opposition). That was true to a great extent if they
adopted the standard of 1832, and the reason was that the
abuses which culminated in that year were, to a great ex-
tent, swept away by the measure then passed. (Renewed
cheers from the Opposition) A nation did not stir until
it had good and sufficient ground for its doing so, and he
should be sorry to see the nation stirring from a sense of
oppression. (Hear, hear.) He was glad that they were
now living in a time when they were free to discuss the
question without excitement, and nothing could inspire
them with greater hope for the future than that fact. Let
them* therefore, profit by present tranquillity before they
got into troublous times, which even next year might over-
take them. He would only now say that he hoped the
house would not think of committing itself to a motion
destitute of substantial meaning, but consent to do its best
for the satisfactory settlement of the question Lefore it.
(Hear, hear.)
Mr. WHITESIDE said it appeared to him that the
hon. and learned gentleman who had just spoken on this
question with the ability which distinguished him, had
affected to misunderstand the question before the house.
That question was substantially this—whether the Go.
vernment, after proposing to Parliament a measure con-
sisting of three parts, and permitting the subject to stand
for several months in that position, were to be allowed to
cause two of those bills to disappear, in order to reappear
at another time, and under circumstances which might in-
volve the necessity of further debate in that house. (Hear.)
The noble lord assured the house some time ago that an
Irish and Scotch bill should be brought in, but now they
disappeared, and he thought the English bill should dis-
appear also. The hon. member for Lanarkshire wished to
have more members for his county, but if the English bill
passed that would be impossible. The noble lord at the
head of the Government, who was one of the most enthu-
siastic reformers of the age—(laughter)—could inform him
of that fact. He thought the noble lord had quite enough
to do at the present moment without touching their old
Constitution. He had to keep Russia quiet, to console
Belgium, to lament over Switzerland, and to conciliate or
confront France as the case may be, instead of introducing
these Reform Bills. No doubt the noble lord was right in
introducing the three bills together; but he wished to know
why it was that course was departed from in the present
instance.
Mr. BRIGHT said he did not know that he was wiser
than:anybody else with regard to the aim of that discus-
sion ; but with regard to its object there could be no mis-
take. (Cries of " Hear, bear.") They had one amendment
tripping up another. (Hear, hear.) The first was moved
by an hon. member at that (the Ministerial) side of the
house, and proved rather tempting to hon. gentlemen op-
posite ; but having since examined it, they came to the
conclusion that to move the rejection of the bill on such
grounds would be false and injurious, and they therefore
got up the amendment brought forward that evening.
(Cries of " No, no," from the Opposition.) Last year
the right hon. member for Buckinghamshire proposed a
bill on this subject, and the right hon. gentleman either
thought the question an important one. or he played false
to the house and the country. (Hear, hear.) The right
hon. gentleman thought it so important that he proposed
to add 500,000 electors to the constituency of the United
Kingdom. He knew that the right hon. gentleman said,
and his supporters repeated, that he did not take these
500,000 electors in a gross lump, as the noble lord proposed
to do by this bill. (Cries of " Hear, hear," from the Op-
position.) The right hon. gentleman informed the house
that his plan was to select all the good men everywhere,
and from these good, intellectual, and reverential and Con-
servative citizens make up this body of 500,000 men to add
to the present electors. The question which he (Mr.
Bright) would like to ask was this :—Where did these
500,000 men live? They did not live in houses above £lO
rental, because they had already the suffrage. They did
not live in houses with a rental between £lO and £6 a-year,
because they would be enfranchised by the bill of the noble
lord. These intelligent gentlemen were not citizens—they
were not heads of families ; they were not householders.
They were not of the number vshichthe noble lord intended
to include by his bill, but were to be found somewhere else,
perhaps living in tents, by some ingenious mode of fancy
franchises, which was to pink them out. The right hon.
gentleman even stated tnat ne we= go further than ins
bill proposed, and would reduce the franchise in the
boroughs ; and more than that, he admitted the claims of
the working classes to the franchise, and said that he would
admit them with generosity and sincerity. (Opposition
cheers.) He was glad to hear there was anybody on that
side of the house animated by the same feeling. (Renewed
cheers.) More than that, the right hon. gentleman was
understood to have given a distinct pledge to certain mem-
bers of the house, not that he would do just that, but that
he would do it in this particular shape, if he was enabled
to bring forward a bill again ; that was, if the present Go-
vernment were not able after the general election to dis-
lodge the right hon. gentlemen from office, he would bring
in a bill giving a £lO rental franchise to the counties, and
a£6 rental franchise to the boroughs. (Hear, and cries of
" Oh, oh;")
Mr. DISRAELI was sorry to interrupt the hon. gentle-
man while speaking, but his general argument was founded
upon a statement which was entirely fallacious. What
the hon. gentleman had stated with regard to the words
used by him in that house was correct enough, but any-
thing the hon. gentleman had said which he had heard from
hearsay, he (Mr. Disraeli) begged to say was perfectly un-
founded. (Opposition cheers.) He had never made a state-
ment directly or indirectly at all inconsistent with what he
had stated in that house. (Renewed cheers from the Oppo-
tion.)
Mr. BRIGHT said that if what he had stated was cor-
rect, he should not hold it to be inconsistent with the sen-
timents expressed by the right hon gentleman in the house.
Ile had his information from speeches which had been de-
livered by members of that house in various parts of the
country after the last session of Parliament. (Loud cries
of " Oh, oh.") He of course would not hold the right hon,
gentleman to that statement after what had just been said
—(hear, hear)—but at the same time the house would ad-
mit that when members had stated it elSe*here. (No, no,
Name, name, Order, order.) 'Well, it would be very easy
to read extracts from the speeches. (Renewed cries of
,c Name, name," "Where, where," from the Opposition.)
He was willing to take the statement of the right hon. gen-
tleman, that there was some misunderstanding with regard
o it, but if hon. members wished to hear what was said in
one speech he could easily refer to it. In a speech made by
the hon. member for Snnderland (Mr. Lindsay) in August
last year, he stated in the most explicit terms that one of
the considerations on which he had given his support to the
Government of Lord Derby was this—that in regard to Re-
form, the late Government should declare that they were
prepared to bring in a bill which should provide for the
borougbs a£6 rental franchise, and for the counties a £lO
rental franchise, and that at least 30 of thesmaller boroughs
should be disfranchised. (Hear, hear, and Oh, oh.) These
were the conditions of the hon. member when he gave his
consent to oppose the party move headed by Lord John
Russell.

Captain JERVIS—That statement was contradicted at
the time. (Hear, hear, and a cry from several members on
the Opposition, " By Lord Derby.")
Mr. BRIGHT said—Coming on this session, the right
hon. member for Bucks had been himself to a certain point
not inconsistent with thislatatement, because if the house
would remember the tone and the matter of a speech deli-
vered by the right hon. member on the question, they
would find that his intelligent judgment led him to the
conclusion that it might not be evil to endeavour to settle.
the question this session, on the basis proposed by the pre-
sent Government. Did not the right hon. gentleman say
he should move rrp:amendment on the second reading ?
(hear, hear)—and farther, b e went on to say that he doubted
extremely whether he should think it necessary or desirable
to offer any arhendments in committee. (Hear, hear.) All'
this had been to hiM (Mr. Bright) eminently satisfactory,
because it showed that the man most eminent on the Op-
position side of the house, the man most competent to form
a
opinion, and the most far-seeing as to the views hnd
wants of the country, did not materially differ with her
Majesty'fi Government
grieved now on this important subject. He
to find that the right hon. gentleman had
taken anothercourse-a course not into which he had been
led by his patty, but_into which he had been driven by the
more violent of his
supporters. (Hear.) And when he
looked at the eminent position
of the right hon. gentleman
—when he felt how clearly
must see what ought to
done with regard to this great he be
grcatnsubject, he lamented that
the right hon. gentleman was
fol-
lowers to a course as enlighteneodtand ableasto persuade his
r., hear)sen 8.
ibleHaes
hthadathef od
was prepared to take himself. ( e a
la-
mented to see that, like a character
the right hon.
gentleman was "to grind in brazen fettersl,
with that heaven-gifted strength." (Helar) uThrerta'sked
Ile
hon. members opposite that if they followed the
assured
of the right. hon. gentleman on many of these groat great
questions, they would find that they acted more
In
son with the wishes and the true interests of the people.
He-should like to ask the attention of the house on
points. Without going to the census of 1861 they all knew
that the population of the kingdom would' be shown by the
next census to be 30,000,000, and they all knew that
7,500,000 of those were men of 21 years and upwards. They
also knew that at present not more than 1,000,000 could
come up to votes and they knew that even allowin for

•
question of the representation of the people. When the 'in the afternoon. An anticipated laseitlide, a foretold in-
noble lord gave up the Irish and Scotch bills he might have capacity of sitting out the debate came over hon. gentlemen
said the whole question could not be put into one bill. opposite. (Laughter.) At half-past 4 they felt that it would
Looking at all the circumstances, he thought the noble lord, be impossible to find strength of body or mind to go on with
who seemed to have abandoned the Scotch and Irish bills, the debate, and they begged and entreated to be allowed to
ought also, in consistency, to abandon at the present ad- go home and prepare fresh speeches for these discussions.
vanced period of the ebseion the English bill, and not longer (Cheers and laughter.) There may be a very fair reason why
urge the house to go into committee upon it. (Hear, hear.) gentlemen who during the last few days have been attend-
Lord PALMERST ON—The lion. and learned gentleman ing upon other amusements--(a laugh)—could not devote
who has just sat down commenced by rebuking the hon. the time and attention necessary to prepare for the subject,
member for Birmingham for having departed from the sub- but Ido not think it is a decorous motion to make to the
ject-matter of this debate—for having made on the question House of Commons upon a question of great national im-
whether the house should adjourn a speech which he said portance. (Cheers.) This motion was founded upon some •
belonged to the third reading of the bill. And the expla- thing which my noble friend stated a few nights ago re-
nation which he was good enough to give for that proceeding specting the bills for England, Scotland, and Ireland. He
of the hon. member for Birmingham was that, being satis- stated that the prolongation of these discussions, the pros-
fied the bill never would come to a third reading, he was sure of public business, and the period of the session ren-
anxious to deliver now a speech which he would not have dered it unlikely that we should this session be able to dis-
an opportunity of delivering on the proper occasion. But pose not only of the English but also of the Scotch and
the hon. and learned gentleman, with the most marvellous Irish bills ; and, that being the case, the Government
inconsistency, has fallen into the very error which he un- thought that no public inconvenience coull arise from post-
justly imputed to the hon. member for Birmingham. (Hear.) poning until next session the discussion of the Irish and
He has made to-night a speech which properly belonged to Scotch bills. The hon. and learned gentleman talked as if it
the committee on the bill ; and he has done so for a better was supposed we were going to abandon the Irish and Scotch
reason than that which he attributed to the hon. member bills. My noble friend did not make any such statement.
far Birmingham ; for, whereas that hon. member, assum- His statement had reference simply to the order of proceed-
ing, as he ssys, that the bill would not be allowed to go to a ing, and to the fact that if we were able to pass the English
third reading, has anticipated that stage by his speech to- bill this session it would be too late to take up the Irish and
night, the hon. and learned gentleman, on the other hand, Scotch bills, which would, therefore, have to be left till the
being determined, for himself and his friends, that this ensuing session. The hon. and learned gentleman says
measure shall not go into committee, founded upon his own he has placed us between the horns of a dilemma, because
decision, which he flatters himself he will be at le to carry either we shall or shall not have to advise the Crown to dis-
into effect, has anticipated by a speech adapted for the come solve Parliament after the English bill is passed ; and he
mittee that stage of the bill which he and his friends have points out what, in his opinion, would be objectionable and
resolved it shall never reach. (Hear.) But the hon. and improper in either alternative. Undoubtedly, it would be a
learned gentleman was not merely inconsistent. If I may most unusual and preposterous course of proceeding for the
be permitted to say so, he was also guilty of a gross act of Government, the moment the English bill has passed, to
insubordination. (A laugh.) It belongs to the right hon. advise the Crown on that account to dissolve Parliament, in
member for Buckinghamshire, on the eve of the prorogation, order that a new Parliament may take up the Irish and
to perform the operation usually termed a review of the ses- Scotch bills. Suppose, for instance, that that had happened
sion. But the hon. and learned gentleman, at the beginning which the Government might without any great exaggera-
of June, has not only entered into a review of the session— tion have expected—suppose that the whole house had
(cheers and counter cheers)—in which he assumed to him- given its mind fairly to consider this question, and had ap-
self the functions of the leader of his own side of the house, plied itself earnestly to settle a safe and proper measure ;
but he has actually trenched upon our duties, for he has like- then the Er glish bill would have been passed at an early
wise executed "the massacre of the innocents." (Laughter.) period of the session ; but would any man have supposed
The hon. and learned gentleman, besides diverging from that upon that account, immediately after Easter, Parlia-
the proper subject of debate by discussing the details of the ment would have been dissolved in order that a new Parlia-
bill, which ought to be reserved for the committee, went ment might consider the other twobills ? Yet the argument
into a still wider range of digression, by discussing all the used by hon. gentlemen opposite in regard to the postpone-
measures that have been proposed in the course of the ses- ment of the Irish and Scotch bills to next session would
sion, some of which have already been, while others of them lead to that. (Hear.) They say, "If you pass the English
have not yet been, submitted to this house. (" Hear," from bill this session, and therefore prospectively alter the Eng-
the Opposition.) Nor was that all. The hon. and learned lish constituencies, then the Parliament elected by the old
member enumerated the blessings which were to have been, constituencies will not be entitled to come together next ses-
or which actually had been, showered down upon us in the sion for the purpose of considering the other two measures."
present year ; but there is one blessing which he omitted What difference in principle is there between a Parliament
to specify—l mean the gift of tongues. (Laughter and whose constituency has been prospectively altered going on
cheers.) The amplitude and excess with which that bles- in the same session to deal with the Irish and Scotch bills,
sing has been bestowed upon the other side of the house to impose taxes, pass Important laws affecting all the great
has been the main reason why:we have been deprived of the interests of the country—what difference, I ask, is there be-
full enjoyment of all those other good things to which he , tween such a Parliament doing that and the same Parlia-
has referred. (Renewed cheers.) If we have reached the ment performing precisely the same operation when called
beginning of June without having even got into committee together after a recess ? lamat a loss to see the distinction.
on a bill which the hon. and learned gentleman accuses us Therefore it by no means follows that because Parliament
of hurrying through the house—(a laugh)—what has been should in one year complete the English Reform Bill, this
the cause of this ? Why, we have been incessantly inter- house should therefore be incompetent to sit again next year
rupted by delays purposely interposed to obstruct the pro- to dispose of the Irish and Scotch bills. It would certainly
greys of a measure which those who wish thus to impede it not be till these three bills had been passed that, on that
have not dared openly to attack. (Cheers.) Sir, I really account there would be any necessity for dissolving Par-
desire to call the attention of the house to the condition in liament and appealing to the new constituency. Moreover,
which we are. (Opposition cheers and a laugh.) The hon. the new Reform Bill bestows on certain classes new rights
and learned gentleman appealed to the house to rescue it- which must be recorded by the registrar, and therefore
self from the undignified position in which it was placed. until the new register has been made, even if all the three
I entirely concur with him. I, too, entreat the house to bills were passed, it is clear a dissolution could not on that
rescue itself from what Ido think a most undignified posi- account take place. I am astonished that the hon. and
tion. Does the house mean to pass a Reform Bill or does learned gentleman should have forgotten what passed in his
it not ? (Laughter and cheers, and counter cheers.) The own country in 1850. A great enlargement of the Irish con-
hon. and learned gentleman ended by asking a string of stituency toox place at that time. But there was no disso-
questions. I also wish to ask a question—viz., whether the lution at that time. No dissolution took place till Lord
house is of opinion that a reform in the representation is Derby's Government came into office it 1852. So that for
proper and right, or whether it is determined that there nearly two years Parliament went on after that prospective
shall be no such Reform ? (Cheers) The course adopted change had been made in the constituency of Ireland. (Hear,
since the introduction of this bill would lead any reason- hear.) Therefore it is absurd to contend that the course
able man to say that the house was resolved there should which my noble friend shadowed forth was one which could
be no Reform Bill—(Hear, hear, from the Opposition)—or not be adopted consistently with constitutional principles
none at least during the present session ; and it seems to me and practice. It would be perfectly possible, and would in-
that the arguments we now hear would equally apply to any volve no impropriety whatever, for the house to pass the
subsequent year in which a similar measure might be pro- English Reform Bill this year, and to sit again next Janu-
posed. Let me beseech the house, then, to consider a little ary or February, or at any other time that the Crown might
the position in which public men stand in reference to this be advised to call it together, for the purpose of going on with
question. As long as the proposal of reform originated on the Irish and Scotch bills ; the dissolution being postponed
one side of the house and was resisted on the other, as long not only until these bills had been passed, but until arrange-
as it was doubtful what might be the influence of argument meats had been made for the registrati nof the newly-
or what might be the effect of a dissolution and re election endowed voters. (Hear, hear.) I soy, therefore, that the
upon the strength of the two great parties, it was justifiable ground on which this proposal is made will not hold water.
for those who opposed reform to oppose it on principle—to But still more extraordinary is the inversion, which could
object at every stage of every bill brought in to carry out an not, in point of order, be proposed directly, but which the
arrangement which they thus steadfastly and determinedly motion for adjournment is intended indirectly to effect—
resisted. But is that the position of the question now ? We the inversion, in my opinion, of putting the cart before the
have had, as was stated by the hon. member for Birmingham, horse (a laugh) —that is, putting the Irish and Scotch bills
not only many andrepeatedannounceraents from the Throne before the English one. (Cries of " No, no," from the
recommending the reform of the representation to the con- Opposition.) Allow me to say that was the object
sideration of the house, but we have no distinction in prin.. of the motion which was announced. (" No, rt..") I
ciple between the two parties in this house. From the mo- presume the hon. member who made this motion will not
ment Lord Derby's Administration proposed a Reform Bill, get up and declare that his object in proposing to adjourn
and that bill was supported by the whole Conservative tho Joneso Rao to act rid of the bill altogothor. The
party, it was impossible that the House of Commons cou'd fact is, that this motion for the adjournment of the debate
consistently and permanently refuse to pass a bill for the re- was substituted for the motion of which notice was given,
form of the representation. (Hear, hear.) And therefore that the English bill should be postponed till after the Irish
those who sit on that side of the house are precluded from and Scotch had been advanced a stage. The hon. and
taking a course inconsistent with the conduct of their leaders learned gentleman undesignedly showed forcible reasons
and their own conduct in support of those leaders. (Hear, why such a course would be impossible. He said the dis-
hear.) And I say it is not a straightforward or manly franchisement is in the English bill, and is to form the
course—(loud cheers)—to endeavour by delay to oppose the foundation for the enfranchisement in the Irish and Scotch
passing of a measure to the principle of which they are as bills. Consequently, you must pass the English bill before
much pledged as those who sit on this side of the house. you can get the materials with which to endow Ireland
(Cheers.) What is it they object to ? The bill that we have and Scotland. (Hear.) The course recommended by hon.
proposed is acknowledged to be very simple in its provisions. gentlemen opposite is, therefore, palpably impossible and
(Ironical cheers.) Yes, sir, no man can deny that. (Cheers.) absurd, and the course we propose is the only one we can
It contains for its leading enactments the reduction of the with propriety pursue. I say again, Ido trust the house
borough franchise, the reduction of the county franchise, will seriously consider the position which this question now
and the transfer of seats. If the hon. gentlemen entertained occupies, and the attitude which parties on both sides of
the objections to the bill which they nowexpress so strongly, the house have assumed in regard to it. Is the house pre-
why did they not oppose the second reading of the bill ? Pare/ to affirm that there shall be no reform in the repre-
(Cheers.) Every argument they now use went to resist the sentation of the people Ido not ask gentlemen on this side
second reading, and I say they ought to have objected to of the house—l know that they will never answer, "No,"
the second reading. They did not do so, and they admitted, —but I ask hon. gentlemen opposite who her, after all
therefore, the principle of lowering these franchises and a that has passed when their leaders were in office, they will
certain transfer of seats, and their arguments consequently venture to affirm that there shall be no reform in the re-
entirely turn on the details and the degree to which these presentation of the people ?It is impossible. If, then, it be
arrangements should be carried. Their arguments neces- impossible, on what ground is it that they refuse to allow
sarily carry them into committee. If they were consistent the house to go into the consideration of the bill which we
in their arguments, and if they were prepared to vote for have proposed ? I say, every argument they have used,
the principle of a bill which reduced the borough franchise every fact that stands recorded as to their conduct when
and the county franchise, and provided for the t ansfer of their leaders were in office, compels them in consistency
seats—if their objections were only to the extent to which to go into committee. It is only in committee that they
any or all of these proposals were carried, I say that, hay • can establish those objections which have been so
ing, voted for the second readipg, they are bound to go into strongly urged by every one who has spoken on the op-
committee to establish those objections in degree, and not posite side of the house to the details of the bill.
in principle, which they feel to the different portions of the We have told them we are ready to consider the details,
bill. (Cheers.) The hon. and learned gentleman, how- and if the house agrees to any modification of these details
ever, finds fault with my noble friend (Lord J. Russell) for consistent with the principles on which this bill is founded,
stating that if when we get into committee the house we do not say that we shall not be prepared to submit to the
should be of opinion that some modification ought to be decision of the house. But there are certain fundamental
made in the arrangements proposed, her Majesty's Govern- principles in the bill which we could not consent to have
ment would not be so wedded to their bill as not fairly to infringed, because that would destroy the measure altoge-
consider any proposals of that kind. The hon. and learned there One main principle of the bill is the reduction of the
gentleman says my noble friend is inconsistent, because borough franchise. (Hear.) If hon. gentlemen opposite are
when the late Government brought in their bill my noble prepared to move that there should be no reduction of the
friend proposed a resolution establishing a certain principle borough franchise, they can do so. If they choose to say we
applicable to the bill they proposed. But the case is en- refus to go into committee and discuss the details of the
tirely different. What was the bill of the late Govern- bill when we object to its principles—we adhere to the prin-
meat? They stated that the one fundamental principle of ciple of Lord Derby's bill, that there should be no change
their bill on which it was founded was the identity of the in the rental qualification for the borough franchise ; if hon.
county and borough franchise—(cheers)—that another gentlemen opposite would say that plainly and distinctly,
principle equally essential to the bill was that county voters then they would be pursuing a fair, manly, and intelligible
in all represented towns should be deprived of their county course of proceeding. But they do not, they cannot take
votes. If my noble friend had asked the house to go that course, because their leader and others who stand high
into committee with the intention of proposing an al- in the estimation of the party have pledged themselves to a
toration of the fundamental principles of the bill of the reduction of the franchise. Two distinguished members of
late Government, it would have been childish the late Government quitted their colleagues because, I be-
and absurd. My noble friend therefore asked the house to lieve, they were in favour of a reduction of the borough
resolve, before they went into committee, that these were franchise, while the rest were against it. Well, then, if
not the principles upon which the bill ought to be founded. hon. gentlemen are not prepared to throw the bill out alto-
The late Government gave up their bill, and quite consis- gether on its merits and on the principles which it em-
tently, b cause the resolution of my noble friend went to bodies, I say they are acting a part utterly unworthy of a
the fundamental principle of the bill. But the objections great political party when they endeavour by delay to pre-
now taken do not go to the fundamental principles, but to vent the house from going into the consideration of a bill
the details and the degree to which these fundamental prin- the importance of which they themselves when in office
ciples are carried out. That being the case, the hon. and have admitted, the expediency of which when in office
learned gentleman says we have been three months discuss- they have acknowledged and acted upon, the principle
ing the bill and have not got into committee yet. Whose of which they no longer contest, and the details of which
fault is that ? It is a little too much for those who inflict form the only ground of their objection. I say that
an injury to make that injury a cause of complaint. upon every principle which ought to guide states-
(Cheers and laughter.) The hon. and learned gentleman men, upon every principle which ought to guide the
then says that the details are not satisfactory, that an in- conduct of a political party, they are bound to go into the
quiry has been established in another place, and which has consideration of this bill in committee and there urge those
not been instituted here. Well, has any one asked fur that objections to the details of the measure which, no doubt,
inquiry here ? Did any hon. gentleman who doubted these they consistently and sincerely entertain. (Hear, bear.)
calculations ask for an inquiry, and did we resist it ? If Is the time of year such as to make this impossible ? It is
such a proposal were not made, it was competent for those later, no doubt, than it might have been. (A laugh.) If
who wished for an inquiry to propose it, and hon. gentle- they had acted on those fair and manly principles which
men are not entitled to make that a complaint until such a ought to guide a great political party, there might have
motion has been negatived. We have heard one hon. mem- been more time to spare. Is this tho conduct of a party
leer or another, having a knowledge of this or that borough, which claims to represent the great portion of the property
say that he had information which led him to think that and intelligence of the country—that portion of the corn-
there has been a difference, not very important, between the mummify which is most attached to the Constitution ? I say
m esult of these returns as laid on the table and the result of that the fair, the proper, and the manly course for such a
his personal and local inquiries. But these are points to be party to have followed was either to have said at once—
urged in committee, and not upon the question of you, Sir, "Your bill is one to the principle of which we can never
leaving the chair ; and, indeed, the whole of the discussion, agree, and therefore we object to the second reading ;" or,
from the period when the bill was introduced to this even- if they did not entertain that opinion, to have said—" The
ing, embodies a series of objections which have been urged principle of your bill is one to which we cannot object, but
evidently for the purpose of creating delay, and a bill which to the details we do object ; the franchise is too low ;it will
hon. gentlemen did not venture to oppose on the second introduce too large a proportion of the democratic element
reading, they now feel themselves at liberty to oppose into the constituencies, but as that is a question to be con
on the general grounds of the nature and tendency of the sidered in committee, we will go at once into committee and
bill. We are now really come to a climax of these pro- endeavour to enforce our objections end establish our
ceedings. (Cheers.) Hitherto, when a debate has been opinions." (Hear.) But such a party should not under the
spun out to a great number of speeches, and the clock has shadow of a pretence of discussing without dividing obstruct
arrives at a period of the night when it was too late for the whole of the great business of the country and prevent
continuing the debate, a motion for the adjournment has those measures being carried which the hon. and learned
been moved at an hour when it was impossible for the gentleman .Bays are so important, and some of which, in
Government to refuse to acquiesce in the motion, with spite of all these delays, I hope, we shall be able to carry
shoals of orators ready with their speeches to continue the before the session is concluded. (Cheers.) That is the
debate. But this evening there has been a novelty, because course which such a party, having a due respect to its posi-
the motion for the adjournment of the debate was made, not tion, and a due regard to the interests of the country, should
as usual at 12 o'clock at night, but at half-past four o'clock have followed, (Hear, hear.) A motion is brought forward

at 4 o'clock in the afternoon to prevent discussion, which

thou vho moved the adjournment seem, nevertheless, pre-
pared to bring on, and I hope that the House, by rejecting
that motion, will rffirm that this bill ought to proceed—
(cheers) —that they aro prepared to go intocommittee, that

they are prepared in committee to hear, to discuss, and to
consider all objections which can be fairly and bone fide
made to the details of the bill, and this house will not,
under the ill-founded apprehension of two dissolutions,
which is entertained on the other side, or under the appre-
henlion of a premature dissolution, be diverted from the
straight path of public duty, but before the house separates,
come to a vote which will show, ono way or the other, what

-----
is the opinion of the house with regard to the measure be-

fore it. (Loud cheers.)
Mr. DI SRAELL—I can congratulate the noble lord on
the first speech which he has made on the Reform Bill
(cheers), and I am not at all surprised that he should have
fallen into some remarkable errors when speaking on the

subject, because I think that hitherto he has taken less in-
terest than might have been anticipated from a Minister so
peculiarly responsible for the introduction of this measure.
It is only because the noble lord has not until this night
taken that part in the debates, th .t I can at all account for
that total misconception of the business of the house with
respect to this measure for the last three months which has
characterised every statement of the noble lord. (Cheers.)
What is the complaint of the noble lord ? The noble lord
does not deny that the business of the house with regard
to the measure has been carried on in a most unsatisfac-

tory manner. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord does not
deny that we are advanced in the month of June, and
have not yet arrived at committee on this bill. The
noble lord is astonished at the position in which his
Government is placed with respect to this measure, and
then the noble lord--with great precipitation and great
rashness, as I think I shall show to the house—falls to
scolding the house, and says the delay which he has
experienced has been unreasonable, unconstitutional, and
irrational. (Loud Ministerial cheers.) Not being suffi-
ciently acquainted with the conduct of this measure, which
has been left to others, the noble lord thinks of course that
the delay has been occasioned entirely by the Opposi-
tion. Why, it was only on Monday last that the Govern-
ment proposed to go into committee. (Cheers.) Here we
are discussing the question upon Thursday, and the noble
lord accounts for the little progress which the measure has
made by the vexatious delays experienced, when it is on
the records of this house that the Government themselves,
having the management of the business of the house, hav-
ing generally all the days which are usually devoted to
private members entirely at its disposal, only last Monday
proposed to go into committee. (Cheers.) But before the
appointment of last Monday let us see what was the con-
duct of this house. What was the conduct of this factious
opposition seeking every delay and opposing to this consti-
tutional proposition of the Minister all the devices which the
forms of the house will permit to prevent the progress of a
measure, of which the noble lord is so enamoured ? Does
the noble lord complain that the second reading was not op-
posed ? (Cheers.) Is that a sign of faction ? Is that a
means of delay ? (Cheers and counter-cheers.) Does the
noble lord complain that upon so important a measure—
admitting, as he says we do, the principle of this bill, the
house—not the Opposition merely—should have taken that
constitutional and solemn occasion to discuss what may
be the consequences of the application of that principle in
its various details, as they occurred to them in the course of
that discussion? Was a debate of five days' length so
unreasonable ? Was that a space of time so unusual
for a discussion upon such a subject that the
noble lord is justified in turning round upon the
house and accusing it of delay ? (Several hon. Members.
—Six days.) Whether five or six days, who
are responsible for the length of that discussion ? (Cheers.)
Is it the Opposition? I think it was stated, and correctly
stated, that in numbers, and, I believe, also in length, the
majority of speeches were made by the supporters of the
noble lord. (Cheers.) The noble lord turns round and says,
that there is only one question to ask, " Are you in favour
of a Reform Bill or not ?" I say that if the noble lord wants
information upon that subject, I recommend him to apply
that inquiry to the hon. member for the city of Edinburgh.
(Cheers.) Let the noble lord ask him whether he is in fa-
vour of a Reform Bill. He sits in immediate vicinity and
is in close political contiguity and sympathy with the noble
lord. (Hear, hear.) For all I know he sits behind the noble
lord, and he can ask the question in a whisper. (Laughter.)
If the noble lord is not satisfied with the opinion of the re-
presentative of that enlightened capital, the modern Athens,
let him ask the member for Bristol what is his opinion, and
whether he is in favour of the Government Reform Bill.
(Cheers.) And if the hon. member for Bristol in polite con-
versation indulges in that invective and sarcasm for which
he is publicly distinguished, I would recommend the noble
lord to address his inquiry to a graver mind—to the hon.
gentleman who must share his confidence, because he owes
to his patronage his exalted post—the member for Salford.
(Loud cheers.) Let him ask the member for Salford whether
he is in favour of Parliamentary Reform. (Hear, hear.) The
noble lord may address this question to a number of gentle-
men on his side of the house. Here, perhaps, we have taken
refuge in more general views. We have stated some large
constitutional objections to the course adopted by the noble
lord and his colleagues. But, for minute criticism—for vigi-
lant captiousness, for a degree of devotion to details which
appear to be prompted by a sentiment of personal panic; I
should say that the great Liberalparty were mere distins
guished than the gentlemen who sit on the 0 pposition benches
(Loud cheers.) Parliament met early. For a whole fort-
night nothing was done. Why was not the Reform Bill
introduced ? (Hear, hear.) I have shown the house that
when the second reading took place the duration of the
debate was not unusual, and was, indeed, becoming a
theme of great importance. I have shown that the greater
portion of that debate, and the portion most opposite to the
merits of the bill, came from the Ministerial benches and
from the habitual supporters of the Gov‘rnment. (Cheers.)
I have shown that when that debate was closed the Govern-
ment did not propose to go into committee until last Mon-
day, the 4th of June—(cheers)—and now I ask the house
and the country whether, under these circumstances, and
in this state of affairs, the Minister is justified in the asser-
tions which he has made this evening, and the tone which
he has adopted upon the subject ? (Cheers.) But is this
all ? Not a tithe of the case. The noble lord says we did
not oppose even the second reading of the measure, but
that we took other means to protract discussion and pro-
voke opposition. What means ? I deny the charge.
(Cheers.) Look at the records of the house, and examine
those who are the authors of the amendments to the motion
that Mr. Speaker do leave the chair. Where do they sit ?
(Hear, hear.) Who are the members who have suggested
amendments by which this measure might be arrested and
ultimately defeated ? I need not refer again to the hon.
and much respected gentleman who gave notice of the
motion for referring the Reform Bill to a select committee,
a motion the nature of which very much fluttered the
noble lord the member for the city of London, but
which lit up the countenances of many members of the
party opposite with an air of relief that was
sparkling and encouraging to all who beheld them.
(Cheers and laughter.) But what is the state of the
house at this moment ? It is true there has been an
amendment to the motion that the Speaker do leave the
chair; but who has made it? Is it a Conservative Minis-
ter who is to be held responsible for all the delays that have
taken place, and whose conduct is to be the excuse for the
clumsy and unsatisfactory manner in which this bill has
been conducted ? (Hear, hear.) Ido not share the confi-
dence of the hon. gentleman who moves this amendment ;
nor is that surprising, for he always sits behind the noble
lord, and when he made this amendment he boasted that
he had supported the noble lord in almost every division
for many years. (Laughter.) Is it to be endured, then,
that in such circumstances, instead of turning round to the
hon. member for Edinburgh, the hon. member for Bristol,
and the author of this amendment, the noble lord, in total
ignorance of what has been going on in the house—(laugh-
ter)—like one just awakened from those rosy slumbers into
which he always falls when the subject of reform is before
the house—(great laughter)—remindifig us of the Ephcsian
sleeper—awakes from his dream, exclaiming " God bless
my soul, what's all this ? Are we going into committee on
the Reform Bill, and are we thus beset with vicious, fee •
tious motions for delay ?" (Laughter.) And then the noble
lord denounces the factious anal unconstitutional conduct of
the party opposite to him, while all the time the noble lord's
intimate friends and supporters are the parties of whom he
should complain. (Cheers and laughter.) The noble lord,
in ignorance of all the warnings so solemnly given, of all
the predictions put forth, and in defiance of all the calcula-
tions that havebeen made, comes forward on this the 7th of
June for the first time, and condescends to say a word, I
will not say in favour of, but about the Reform Bill. (Laugh-
ter.) But let us see what we are doing this evening ? The
noble lord was clearly in error as to all that took place this
evening. lam not surprised at it, as the noble lord was
net here, having been present, probably, in a more brilliant
scene. (Laughter.) I would recommend to the noble lord
that in future he should adhere to the salutary rule that has
regulated his Parliamentary conduct throughout the session,
and not venture again to speak either about the Reform Bill
cr the proceedings in this house with regard to it—(laughter)
—because he has entirely misrepresented the motion of my
hon. friend behind me—(no, no !), who, in a speech of great
spirit and intelligence, introduced the subject before us to-
night, and who was led to take the particular course which
he did take in consequence of an intimation from the chair
that it was not competent for him to propose another motion
of which he had given notice. (Hear, hear.) The hon.
gentleman, believing that he was following the proper Par-
liamentary course, made the motion which is now before us.
But let me say one word as to what the noble lord has at
some length urged about the alleged opposition and criti-
cism of this bill by the house. Hitherto there has been no
opposition, but there ought to be no criticism on this mea-
sure, says the noble lord, because we are all agreed in prin-
ciple, and therefore discussion except in committee is not to
be tolerated. (Hear, hear.) What does the noble lord mean
by saying we are all agreed in principle ? for it is desirable
to have a true conception of the use of the term. The noble
lord says that before the Government of Lord Derby there
were two parties—one for and one against reform, and that
he says was a convenient system. No doubt it was a con-
venient system, for the Liberal party in opposition always
constructed and organised themselves on the principle of
Parliamentary reform:; but when they got into office nothing
wa; ever done. (Hear.) The question was left open to any na-