The Sun.
London, England, 1860-04-20 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, APRIL 20, 1860.

1M PE MAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS—(YEsTERDAY.)

The Lonn CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack
3t five o'clock.

Lord COLVILLE of CULROSS presented a petition
against any further war with China. -
The Earl of SHAFTESBURY presented several peti-
tions from Clapham, Stepney, and other places in favour of
the Sunday Trading Bill.

certain other persons. More than one letter had been ad-
dressed to the highest officer of the Government calling
upon him to grant contracts as a reward for political ser-
vices. One letter had been addressed to Mr. Buchanai,
when President, urging him to take care that the contract
for the pumping machinery in a steam ship should be given
to a particular house in Philadephia, with a view to obtain-
ing their politictil influence in the election. There was no
disguising the fact. It was put distinctly on the ground of
the impoitanco of obtaining their support in the pending
elections. lie appealed to their lordship if a letter
had been addressed to the Prime Minister of this country
making a demand of that kind, and if it hai been proved
that he had listened to it, whether such a proceeding would
not have aroused the indignation of all parties in Parlia-
ment, and whether he would not have been subjected to
the severest censure. But how did the President of the

United States treat the matter ? The letter was simply sent
to the Secretary of the Navy, with the endorsement, " The
enclosed letter from ---, of Philadelphia, is submitted to
the attention of the Secretary of the Navy.—J. B." The
political corruption which prevailed in the United States

had had an effect upon every interest and every class, and

also, he was sorry to say, upon the courts of law. Some
years ago the Supreme Court was a court of the highest
authority, and its decisions were treated with the greatest
nspect, not only at home but in this and other countries.
The judges of that court were enlightened and honourable

men, and their decisions were often quoted for their great
moral weight. How had this state of things been altered ?
Under the system which had arisen in America, the ap-
pointments of the Supreme Court, like all other appoint-
ments, had been used for the promotion of party purposes,
and the court had.lostAlil high character it formerly pos-
sessed. It no longer commanded the respect which it did
formerly, and time of its recent decisions had created a
feeling almost of disgust among all high-minded men in
America. But this was not the'worst. In many of the
States the judges were oleoted—they were not only elected
originally, but elected for short periods, and consequently,

had to be re-elected, ho believed in some of the states annu-
ally, their salaries being paid by an annual vote. All this
had arisen in consequence of the adoption of a system which
placed all the political power in the hands of one class, and
that the lowest ; and the effect had been of a most deteriora-

ting character both upon the church and the bar. He had
seen it stated in American newspapers—and the statement
had been confirmed by impartial observers—that the laws
of that country had become a mere tissue of cobwebs for the
purpose of resisting eithor a rich man, or one who had ob-
tained a fleeting popularity. It was stated truly enough
that the rich man had very little indeed to fear from the

operation of the law in the United States. He would
merely mention one fact which occurred so far back as 1838,
to show the miserable state of the administration of the law
in America. A sort of quarantine existed near a town in
which -criminals were placed, but which having become
offensive to the inhabitants they attempted in vain t) get it
removed, but failing to do so they actually set fire to it and
burnt it down. The outrage was an open one, duly adver-
tised beforehand, and every particle of the programme was
carried out.- Proceedings were taken against the rioters but
after what had been described as a protracted farce the
judge pronounced the decision that, as the quarantine had
been pronounced a nuisance by the grand jury, the rioters
were justified in burning it down. That was a sample of how
law was administered in the United States, and he could

prove that even at the present time so badly were the laws
administered that in many of the most important towns of
America neither life nor property was safe. He might be
told that there was no danger of such a state of things
occurring here, bit ke asked what security could be
given that it would not if they gave all the power to
ono class and elected members by a mere numerical
majority. He believed that America was a very favour-
able country for trying such an experiment in, and
he would refer their lordships to the admirable letter on
that subject written by tho late Lord Macaulay, that dis-
tinguished man, that great historian and statAman, in

whose death the country had just had such an irreparable
lose. In that letter Lord Macaulay described the experi-,
ment as having been tried under circumstances of far less
danger than it would have been tried in this country, in
which, being the older and more densely populated country,
the difficulties and dangers would have been far greater.

They ought, then, to be extremely cautious how they took
steps which might lead to such a state of things. They
need not, however, go to another country to enable them to
judge of the manner in which such power would be exer-
cised. Only let them refer to the speeches which during
the past year a gentleman of great energy and talent, ho
alluded to Mr. Bright, had delivered, and lot them look at
the points cheered. They would then see some test of the
degree of wisdom, moderation, and justice with which the
power would be used if placed exclusively in the hands of
one class. He felt ho bad already trespassed too long upon
their lordships' attention, but he felt that the strongest
possible proofs had been given of the evils which follow
from extending the franchise to such an extent that the pu-

litical power of the higher classes would be swamped by the
votes of the masses. When they had a constitution which
was practically found to work well, and which secured to
the inhabitants of this great nation the largest amount of
liberty and of the blessings of good government, he thought
they ought not lightly to disturb the arrangement, and that
above all things, they ought not to adopt any change of
which they could not see pretty clearly tho probable effect
and the ultimate consequence. (Hear.) They were bound

to remember that the constitution of the country was, as it
had been well described by our greatest political writer, a
well-balanced machine, which they could not venture to dis-
turb in any of its parts by a rash hand, without being in dan-
ger of destroying its working altogether. They were bound
to consider all these things, and to remember that in correct-
ing admitted faults, they might derange the balance, unless
they took care at the same time to correct faults in opposite
directions. He believed that the circumstances of the times
imposed upon them a great and solemn duty ; and when
ever the Reform Bill was brought before them it would be
their duty to give it the most deliberate attention, and stead-
fastly ti refuse to pass any measure which they did not be-
lieve would work well for the future interests of this great
country. In order that they might have materials which
would enable them to form a judgment as to the effect of
any measure that might be brought before them, he now
begged, in the terms of the notice which he had given, to
move for the appointment of a select committee to inquire
into the subject. (Cheers,)
Tho Duke of ARGYLL said it was not the intention of
the Government to oppose the motion. They were perfectly

willing that the noble earl should have the committee for
which he asked, but it must be with a distinct understand-
ing that the appointment of a select committee should not

have the effect of shelving the question, or of interposing
any unnecessary delay in the consideration of the Reform
Bill, in the event of its coming up from the House of Com-

mons. Upon that distinct understanding the Government
were prepared, to enter into the inquiry with his noble
friend. It would, however, be impossible for the committee
to inquire into all the matters to which his noble friend had
referred. For instance, if they were to inquire into the de-

cay of nations in ancient aad modern times, and into the
alleged decay of the American constitution as compared
with the constitution devised by General Washington and
his associates, he should altogether despair of any progress
being made for a considerable time, and ho should regard
with unmitigated commiseration the members who might
be chosen by their lordships to serve upon the committee.
But he did not understand that his noble friend desired any
such inquiry. On the contrary, what he wished was rather
to verify or to find out the errors which were alleged to be
oontained in certain returns which had been laid before Par-
liament for the purpose of providing information as to the
probable effect of their bill. As the Government were wil-
ling that the returns should be referred to a select commit-
_ _

tee, he did not feel it necessary to enter at present upon any
defence of them, but he must say that ho was surprised at

the manner in which his noble friend had treated the ques-
tion. His noble friend, in proof of the inaccuracy of the re-
turns, said he need only refer to the single fact that several
members of Parliament, representing import tnt constituen•
cies, had in their place in the House of Commons stated that

in reference to their own respective boroughs the returns were
most erroneous. He (theDake of Argyll) was aware that such
allegations had been made,but he did not think it was any proo f
that they were correct. Ho was informed by the department
from which the returns emanated that in consequence of the
allegations, inquiries had been instituted, and it was found
that in all the cases complained of the returns were per-
fectly correct. His noble friend ought to bear in mind that
the allegations had been made in the vaguest possible man-
ner, and that they were statements generally from indivi-
dual constituents who wrote to their members to say that
they had instituted inquiries which induced them to con-
clude that the returns were inaccurate. It was said that in
a large number of boroughs the strict requirements of the
law were not complied with, and that all those who wore
assessed to the poor rates were not entered upon the rate-
books. He believed it was perfectly true that in a large
number of parishes and boroughs a system existed of a com-
pounding for tenancies, and in those cases the names of the
tenants did not appear. Bat in preparing the returns spe-
cial instructions had been given in all cases of compounding
tenancies to give the number of tenements of the requited
value, and he believed they were all included in the returns.
With regard to the country constituencies, it was perfectly
true that elaborate returns of the same character had, not
been prodlded by Parliament; but there were other means
of getting at, the county franchise, and there were various
'returns by which the information could be satisfactorily
obtained. Another reason which prevented the Govern-
ment from presenting to Parliament a return peefeOlY
accurate on that subject was that the question era £lO
constituency in counties was a prominent feature in the
measure of their predecessors in office. It was likewise a
principle which had been over and over again voted by a
i majority of the other house, atd was objected to by very

few persons. Having said this much as to the assent of
Government to this inquiry, and having guarded himself
Against admitting this inquiry as a cause of delay to the
question of reform, he should have been content with
saying no more on the general question of reform ; but he
wt•as sure it was felt that any member of the Government
_ _

who followed the noble lord would be guilty of a great
dereliction of duty if lie allowed all that his noble
fiend had said to pass without observation, and he
Might say some protest also. There was this difficulty in

answering the objections of his noble friend, and that was
that those objections seemed wholly wide of the mark. liis
noble friend had occupied the time of the houso for very
nearly an hour with details upon the degeneracy of Ameri-
can democracy. Now, if there was any proposal to introduce
into this country universal suffrage and the ballot, which he
believed was called in America " the sneaking ballot," he

should have been content to receive the lecture of his noble
friend as a protest against that system. For himself, he
viewed with the greatest possible alarm the principle of
universal suffrage, especially when it was accompanied by

Rae ballot, for he believed these two principles were the

greatest instruments of modern despotism. He saw them
used all over Europe, sometimes to cajole, sometimes to
frighten people to surrender, not their own liberties, but also
the liberties of others, who were more instructed and more
independent than themselves. But he repudiated his noble
friend's lecture as applying to any measure proposed or
likely to be proposed by any Government in this country.
His noble friend had intimated pretty clearly his opinion,
which was that he desired no change whatever in the existing
institutions of the count' y. He was opposed to all reduction
in the borough franchise. But was this an opinion that he
thought any Government was now in a position to act up-1n ?
He presumed that his noble friend was, while upon this
point, received with very faint acquiescence by noble lords op-
posite ; and he begged the house to recollect the position in
which this question stood, in reference to the leading men of
all parties who were all pledged upon it. It was upwards
of nine years since the First Minister of the Crown
undertook to deal with the question of Parliamentary
Reform, and since that time there had been six Go-
vernments, every one of which, except the first short Go-
vernment of the noble earl opposite (the Earl of Derby),
had taken office pledged to consider this question, and to
' provide a settlement of it if they could. His noble friend
(Earl Grey) was himself a member of the Government of

1852; and that Government having directed the attention
of Parliament to the matter, if he recollected right, in a
speech from the Throne, a bill was subsequently proposed
to reduce the borough franchise to within 20s. of what was
proposed by the present Government. When he heard his
noble friend protesting that there was no necessity for
touching this question, he could only ask himself when had
this conviction flashed on the mind of his noble friend. His

noble friend had had a long experience of ;public affairs in
1852, and he knew how that determination of the Govern-
ment was brought about. (" Hear, hear," from Earl Grey.)
He knew very well what his noble friend meant by that
cheer—he meant to intimate that this question had been

raised by the personal desire of one who was then one of
his colleagues. (Hear.) It was known, however, from
public sources how that was brought about. The determi •

nation of Lord J. Russell's Government did not arise so
far as the public knew from any personal desire of that
noble lord to take up the question; but it arose in this way.
The Government was beaten, more than once, he believed,
on a motion brought forward by an independent member
of the other house (Mr. Locke King) on this very question
of a £lO county franchise, though the Government vigor-
ously opposed the motion. The defeat of Lord J. Russell's
Government on that question led to their resignation, and
the noble earl opposite having been called in to form a Go-
vernment, he in stating the reasons why he resigned the
task which had been committed to him by the Queen, en-
tered into a long and able analysis of what had takes
place in the House of Commons, and stated that Lord J.
Russell had been placed in a minority not by the Conser-
vatives but by his own party voting against him on the
question of reform. He contended that this disproved
the assertion of his noble friend that this question
had been raised by Lord J. Russell. It was raised
by an independent member of Parliament on the question
of the £lO franchise, and the Government felt that they
could not deal with one branch only of reform, but if they
touched it they must deal with the whole question. The
change of opinion which had come over his noble friend he
believed had arisen from the long intervals which sepa-
rated the speculations of an individual acting in an isolated
position from the acts of members of a government acting
together, and responsible for the conduct of public affairs.
With regard to the borough franchise, he did not think full
justice had been done to the bill for reform which had been
brought forward by the late Government; but he thought
the greatest indignity done to that bill was inflicted by its
most unnatural parent. That bill was most ably drawn, and
was based upon principles as distinct as any bill that was
ever submitted to Parliament ; and one principle was that
reform must be dealt with exclusively of any lowering of
the borough franchise. Mr. Disraeli said on introducing
that bill that he was quite ready to admit that there were
many persons quite capable of exercising the franchise who
did not live in a £lO house, and whom he should wish to see
have the franchise. But the question was, should they ob-
tain that result by—he would not say the vulgar experiment
—but by the coarse and common expedient recommended,
the lowering of the franchise ? In another part of his
speech Mr. Disraeli said that it would be unjust, not to say
intolerant, when guarding themselves against a commercial
oligarchy, that they should receive a household oligarchy ;
and, in continuation, he said he could not look on the re-
duction of the franchise but with alarm. He (the Duke of
Argyll) did not wish to throw the least degree of ridicule
en this doctrine, for there were many persons who thought
that the borough franchise was low enough already. The
Government however, did not think this was the case.
During the discussion on the bill of the late Government
in the House of Commons every subsequent speech of Mr.
Disraeli was marked by a distinct step backwards from the
position which he had taken ; and when he was pressed to
say what was the principle of his bill, it was impossible to
get any answer from him ; but what he said in substance
was, that everything was to ge before the committee. He
(the Duke of Argyll) did not think that was dealing fairly
with the matter. He would now direct attention to what
was said by the right hon. gentleman when the new Parlia-
ment assembled. When the Conservative Government had
been defeated upon the motion of Lord J. Russell, the Go-
vernment said, " We do not go to the hustings with this
bill; we are quit of the bill ;" and the object of being quit
of it was to get rid of the principle that the franchise was
not to be lowered in boroughs. Noble lords on both sides of
the house knew that while_there was no sort of democratic
excitement during the last general election, yet that there
was a considerable and general pressure put upon those who
wished to be representatives in order to procure a lowering
of the franchise. When the new Parliament met a vote of
want of confidence was moved, and Mr. Disraeli said on that
occasion, which was the most significant of all occasions,
that the borough franchise was not in the same state of
"maturity as the county franchise, for until the last great
debate that question had never been thoroughly grappled
with in that house. It had never been brought forward by
any person of eminence, and therefore in that direction they
had proceeded very cautiously. He was perfectly ready to
admit on the part of the Government that their proposition
was not favoured by the house, nor was it sufficiently
favoured by the country to be one on which they could
insist. The right hon. gentleman went on to say that the
question, however, was ono which must be dealt with, and
that they were then ready to adopt a course for lowering
the borough franchise. (Hear.) He (the Duke of Argyll)
then asked his noble friend (Earl Grey), considering the
pledges which every Government had given upon this dues •
tion, if he thought it possible that any Government could
in future bring in a Reform Bill which did not deal with
the borough franchise. (Hear.) He asked the house was
there anything so very wonderful in this lowering of the
borough franchise ? There seemed to be a theory now in
England, which he apprehended was a now one—that our
society was travelling in horizontal lines—that each man
was arrayed against his fellow-citizen who was above him
—that he was hostile to the institutions of the state, and
was ready to interfere with the rights of property. He
asked, was there any foundation for that theory in the ac-
tual life of England ? (Hear.) Ho saw in the papers not
very long ago a speech made by his noble friend Lord Stan-
ley at Liverpool, in which he gave distinct utterance to the
sentiment, which he (the Duke of Argyll) believed true,
that the working Classes of this country were in the main
to be relied upon. (Hear.) If that were so, why all this
horror of lowering the borough franchise ? (Hear.) He
said it was preposterous addresiing lectures to that house
upon the subject of lowering the borough franchise. A very
remarkable inquiry had taken place last session before a
committee moved fer by his noble friend (Lord Ellen-
borough) with reference to the discussions which were
likely to take place respecting the municipal franchise, and
he thought the balance of evidence taken before that com-
mittee went to prove that at Newcastle and other towns
bribery and corruption had taken plape at municipal elec-
tions ; but he should explain that the class of voters in
those towns was of the very lowest kind. The report
stated that the higher order of artisans were quite as ;in-
telligent and independent as the smaller class of shop-
keepers. His noble friend was anxious to retain this
class of voters, but by what line could he distinguish that
class of voters from those whose introduction to the fran-
chise would, in his opinion, produce so much evil. He was
surprised the noble lord did not refer to the evidence given
on that subject. All the evidence went to show that £6 or
£7, and some went as low as £5, was represented as thetaine
that would give the franchise to the higher class of
sans, and exclude the lower classes. Was that evidence
which the noble lord ought to ignore, when he knew that
the present, or any Government, must deal with the ques-
tion of the borough franchise For his own part, he be-