The Sun.
London, England, 1867-05-03 00:00:00

THE TORNADO.

Lord STANLEY said, owing to the position of affairs
at the present moment between this country and Spain,
he had to ask tho hon. member fur Honiton to abstain
from bringing the matter of the Tornado under discussion
to-morrow evening.
Mr. B. COCURANE regretted that he bad been asked

to postpone his juotion, but ke could not after the obser-
vations of the noble lord bring it forward. He hoped the
Government would enable him to bring the matter under
the attention of Parliament as early as possible. Ile would
take that opportunity of stating that the course the noble
lord had taken in his communications with the Govern-
ment of Spain he believed met with general satisfaction.
(Hear, hear.)
THE METROPOLITAN GAS BILL.

In reply to an HON. MEMBER,
Sir S. NORTIICOTE said that certain proposals bad
been made to the gas companies, but no definite result
bad yet been arrived at. If the proposals were accepted,
the bill would be read a second time, as a matter of courv,
but if not then it would remain with the house whether it
would give its assent to the bill proceeding in the usual

way.
EPPESENTATION
!_ll OF THE PEOPLE BILL.
On the motion for going into C)/111/11tb
he
e last
ho division
haa come
3 011 this bill,
h
Earl GROSVENOR that sides t
and
had consulted
to the conclusio'nVitthhat jvv
seerail)uld quite useless in bring-
ing forward his amendun3nt in favour of a .£3
rating franchise, and therefore he should not
press that
part of his amendment, but, at the s.trne tittl9, he held
himself perfectly at liberty to bring
forward tl.lO second
:I
part of his ntinduriut. (flour, hoar.) l'h
had induced hint to adopt that course wootitt:tt reason that
; thoufht
it would be useless to occupy the limo of the houso in Ls-
en,sing a, matter which there was no hope of carrying.
(Clear, hear.) Ilia first desire was to s.w the bill made a
satisfactory one, and if it was not, then t 44re would remain
the opportunity on the motion for its third reading of mov-
ing its rejection. (Clear, hear.) The noble lord then pro-
ceeded to defend himself against the charge of collision
that had been made against him, andsaid it was altogether
a mistake, as he had never acted in collision with any
member to defeat the bill.
The house then went into committee on the bill.
On clause 3 being read,

_ .
Mr. A YRTON moved an amendment, the effect of
which was. to fix the time of residence neczssary
for a qualification for being placed upon the re-
gister of voters at 12 months instead of two years, as was
proposed by the clause as it stood in the bill. He con-
tended that tin time Axed by tto arfertazelit

altogether too long, and, although personally he was in -
favour of less time even than he had proposed, he brought
forward the amendment as a compromise, which he hoped
would be accepted by the Government. (Hear, hear.)
Sir J. PAKINGTON said he was sorry he could not, on
the part of the Government, agree to the proposal of the
hon. gentleman the member for the Tower Hamlets. He
believed there was a sincere and earnest desire on both
sides of the house, and out of doors, that this long-vexed
question should be disposed of, and that a satisfactory bill
should as soon as possible be passed. He would further
admit that it was the duty of the Government, so far as was
consistent with their principles, to reciprocate the concilia-
tory spirit displayed by hon. members on the other side of
the house. It was, therefore, with great reluctance that
the Government could not consent to the amendment.
The object the Government had in view iu fixing the
period of residence at two years was that the franchise
should not be open to the migratory population, but should
be limited to those whose station in life ,gave some security
for the proper exercise of the right. Ile thought that hon.
members would admit the Government were making large
concessions by offering the franchise to every householder
iu the country who gave proof of his respectability and
fitness. lie was sorry to observe that in a spr2ech recently
delivered by the hon. member for Birmingham, at Birming-
ham, the hon. gentleman had alluded to particular parts of
the bill in terms which were hardly consistent with the
facts of the case. The hon. member, in referring to the
bill, said that a two years' residence was a monstrous pro-
position—(Opposition cheers)--and that it was by such
mean and contemptible methods the Government, while
pretending to give the franchise, sought in a little dirty
way to prevent the people from obtaining it. He turned
for a complete refutation of such language to the Act
which regulated the municipal franchise. That Act was
passed by a Liberal Administration, and he wished to
know whether the hon. member for Birmingham would
charge them with having resorted to mean and con-
temptible tricks and little dirty ways when they in-
troduced that Act. Its object was to enable every
householder in municipal boroughs, who could give cer-
tain proofs of respectability and permanence, to exercise
the franchise in municipal elections. These proofs were
length of residence and payment of rates. The period of
tesidence required in that Act was two years and eight
months, which was a longer period than that required in
the bill for those who were to vote at Parliamentary elec-
tions. He wished to remind the committee that the Muni-

cipal Act was not the only act introduced by a Libera.
Government under which a long period of previous resi.
donee was required as a test of fitness for the franchise. In
the Reform Bill Introduced in 1834 by Lord Aberdeen's
Government, of which Lord Russell and the right hon.
gentleman the member for South Lancashire were mem-
bers, the period of residence required was no less than two
years and six months, with the further obligation of the
full payment of rates. Offering, as they do, a very wide
extension of the franchise, the Government are bound to
take such precautions and securities as were adopted by
Liberal administrations. Fortified by these precedents,
and convinced that they are only asking a fair and rea-
sonable security, the Government must take the sense of
the house on the proposal now submitted.
Sir IL PALMER heard with satisfaction the statement
that the Government do not regard this as a question of
principle ; because it is an assurance that should the
house think it necessary to adopt the proposal, members
will not run the risk of all the alarming consequences
threatened on another occasion. (Laughter.)
Mr. M. T. BASS rose amidst some manifestations of im-
patience. He hoped the house would extend some little
indulgence to one who had been stigmatised as a traitor
and renegade for his honest vote in that house. With re-
gard to the amendment, it appeared to him. impossible to
resist it on any just ground, unless you bring all alike to
the condition of two years' residence. Very hard names
had been applied to gentlemen below the gangway on ac-
count of a recent vote, and his hon. friend the member for
Birmingham accused him of treachery, and called him re-
negade for assisting an anti-reforming Government to pass
a bad bill, and even insinuated dishonesty. his hon. friend
abuses his great ability and power of speech when he at-
tributes to honest men unworthy motives. What would
the hon. member himself say were it imputed to him that
he was playing a part, and looking to office ? (Hear.) No
man could be better pleased to see him in office. Ho (Mr.
Bass) believed in his honesty, as he believed every gentle-
man to be honest who has not been proved otherwise.
(Laughter.) Such remarks wore very unjust towards one
who had been 20 years a member of the house, and had
followed the Liberal party through good report and through
bad. Are we not of the same flesh ? Are we to be cuffed,
and lie down and be thankful for it ? (Laughter.) The
member for Birmingham says it is a bad bill, but themem-
bar for Bradford says there is a great deal of good in it,
and that it will admit 700,000 persons to the franchise.
Mr. FORSTER rose to explain that ho bad not made
that statement. He had said that, as far as the limit of
house occupation went, the bill removed obstacles in the
way of 700,000 persons obtaining the franchise.
Mr. BASS —The hon. gentleman drew a distinction
without a difference. Tho member for Halifax said
there was a great deal of good in the Government bill,
but those who voted for it are called traitors to their
party. He (gr. Bas.) had not deserted the leader of the
Liberal party, but had acted on his advice. What did
he tell us at his own house? (Laughter, and cries
of " Question.") The house should bear with him a little,
for he was on his defence. The right hon. gentleman said,
"You must hare a bill from the Government, but you must
take care to have a good bill." He appealed to what was
said by the member for Bradford. Well, he was for getting
a great deal of good. (Question.) It was said they ought to
throw out the bill and trust to a dissolution; but he pre-
ferred a bird in the hand to one in the bush, especially a
bird of such varied plumage that you cannot make out
whether it is fish, flesh, or good red herring. (Laughter.) li
He did not desert the party; the party deserted him. (Loud
laughter and Ministerial cheers.) The right hon. gentle-
man would not accuse him of any disrespect fel- saying that
no one had set so many examples of independent voting.
Who has oftener left his party than the right hon gentle-
man ? The hon. member for Birmingham, though a Liberal
member, did his best to turn out tho Government of Lord
Palmerston. He (Mr. Bass) voted to get a Reform Bill— a
good Reform Bill, or as good as he could get; and he be-
lieved that in doing so he voted in the best interests of
the country.
Mr. BRIGHT—I am very sorry that anything I have
said anywhere has given any pain to my hon. friend the
member for Derby, but it seems to mo my hon. friend is in
a rather unfortunate position through the course which lie
has pursued, seeing that he has had to write two long
letters to the public papers, and that not being sufficient,
he has made a speech to-night, which for him is unusually
long, in explauetion of that course. (No, no, and hear,
hear.) I am sorry, too, that my hon. friend felt that the
observations which I made were so suitable a cap for him
that he put it on, because I made no reference to him, as
the house knows, by name, for ho was not in my thoughts
at the time, as ho certainly could not be when I was saying
anything unpleasant of any of my countrymen. (Hear,
hear.) My hon. friend ought to be a little more just himself
before he is so critical of others, because in one of his let-
ters he referred to what had taken place after the division,
and did not hesitate to express an opinion in regard to the
hon. member for Sandwich, I suppose, by his having men-
tioned him to-night, and the course which that hon. mem-
ber took on that evening. My hon. friend said that those
sitting on the front Opposition bench did not like any
longer to be left out in the cold. (Uh, oh, and laughter.)
Well, I believe that is not a very pleasant observation to
make to one's friends; therefore the lion. gentleman should
not be so very thin-skinned when he puts into print what
he wrote, not in the heat of debate, but in the cool and
healthy state a man is likely to be in who has spent half a
day fishing on the Spey, and then sits down and pens such
a letter about his friends. (Hear.) Now, one word with
regard to the point before the committee. The right hon.
member for Droitwich has quoted some words that 1 said
at Birmingham, and he thought I used language which
might be said to be damaging to, and depreciatory of, the
bill of the Government in this particular. I can only tell
him I believe I expressed most accurately the opinion of
5,000 or 6,030 of hie countrymen to whom I spoke • and
looking at the discussions which have taken place through-
out the country, both at meetings and in the newspapers,
that is the opinion which has been formed by the classes
affected by this particular portion of the bill. I will address
what I have to say to hon. gentlemen opposite. Some
people say you never convinceany body in this house. You
do not change votes perhaps, but I believe you do some-
times a little alter the sentiments of those to whom you
speak. At the present time we have come to the conclu-
sion that there should be a large extension of the borough
franchise, and we are rather seeking for qualifications on
which to admit them than for restrictions under which
to exclude them. (Hear, hear.) According to the speech
of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, if the Government
could pick out another half million who were, from
his point of view, qualified, they would have no objec-
tions to admit them, because the house has lost that ab-
surd terror of numbers by which it was, in some degree;
actuated during the former discussions on this question,
and particularly last year. (Hear, hear.) This is a re-
striction which is not founded upon any proved or sus-
pected disqualification. It is simply a restriction you em-
ploy when you wish to get rid of numbers, and it is not
founded on the assumption even that the numbers are tog
fit for the franchise. It is beside the question to tell us
what we proposed to do in 1854. You have made some
progress since last year—(laughter)—and it would Le
absurd to suppose that the right hon. member for South
Lancashire and his friends have made no progress in the
same period. (Hear, hear.) There were many objections
to the bill of 1854, some because the Government was nut
so good as it ought to be ; but we are not to say that, be-
cause Lord Aberdeen did this or that, we in this new world,
where everybody is a reformer, must be so absurd as to go
back to that. Some persons suppose that the clause would
keep out poor people, and those not fit to be electors ; but
bear in mind, it would keep out the rich people as well as
the poor. I met a gentleman last night who came up from
Lancashire, and who said that under th present restriction
he had been a year and a half before he could get a vote for
his borough. Ha is a man of great property, and, ill all
PrQbabilitn next Parliament he will be a =matt of

this house. He is now a £lO occupier, and is only liable
to the restriction of one year. If he were one who came
in under £lO, he would be liable to the restriction of two
years and four months, and would not be liable to get his
franchise until the election after the Ist of December.
Therefore, every man from £lO down to the lowest
householder would be subject to this restriction, and
there would not only bo a difference in the quality of
voters, but there would be a great difference in dif-
ferent boroughs. In some, I have been told by an hon.
member, it would make a difference of more than 25 per
cent. In the borough of Rochdale the present electors
are under 1,500. If the period of qualification of twelve
months were abolished, and if every occupier were upon the
register without reference to time and residence, there would
be 1.800. Therefor,, 300 are kept off by one year; and I
take it for granted that by two years another 300 are kept
out. That is an important matter. In all places in the
north of England where the growth of houses is so large,
and where there is a constant accession of occupiers, new
streets, and new suburbs continually, this restrictive clause
will act with great severity and with great injustice. What
is the object of the clause ? It cannit make any appreciable
difference in the constituencies; therefore it can only be for
the purpose of cutting off by an arbitrary line those parsons
who are qualified to vote, through which great dissatisfac-
tion will be caused to all who come under its operation. I
was surprised that the member for the Tower Hamlets did
not refer especially to the metropolis. London, though ono
great city, is composed of five or six boroughs. if a man
lived on the western side of a street and reeved to the east
side—say from Marylebone to Finsbury, or from the City of
London to Southwark—ho might go on from three years
to three years, and his life might wane, and he would never
get an electoral right. (A laugh.) This man might be one
of the highest class of artisans, who might be obliged to
make these changes in order to procure subsistence for
himself and his family. lam sure the Chancellor of the
Exchequer should have a word to say on this question ; he
would not defend a proposition like that. I have stated that
if a man came into a borough on the Ist of August, 1867, he
would not get the franchise until the end of 1870, a period
of three years and four months, and ho might be five years
before he could exercise that franchise. I ask hon. gentle-
men opposite, as we have got rid of so many prejudices, to
get rid of this. After the general reformation of charac-
ter which is now in progress, I am sure you would do well
to get rid of it. This restriction is not for the purpose of
lessening numbers ; for, after all, the lessening of numbers
would be no advantage whatsoever in the view of any-
thing you may consider conservative, in the sense in
which that word has ordinarily been used in this house.
The hon. gentleman opposite must admit, if there were no
arguments to the contrary, that the arrangement must be
a bad one, that all over £lO must come in under one pro-
vision, and all under £lO under another and unfavourable
provision ; and I believe that if this clause be passed as it
is, the first Parliament elected under it will see a motion
brought forward to abolish it. It would begin a series of
discussions on Reform, which would lead on year by year
to greater agitation, and in all probability you would have
in a few years a general unsettlement. I am convinced
that at this moment the Chancellor of the Exchequer
is of opinion that this proposition is not to be defended
by argument, and he would be much obliged if the
hon. member for North Lancashire (Mr. Wilson-Patten)
—and there is not a more just-judging man in this
house—and half a dozen others would get up and say
there is not much in this matter, and they did
not see any reason for retaining the restriction. (Laughter.)
I do not think it worth while to use one other argument,
because the house seems in some degree to have rejected
my view of the question. Still I think it is desirable
that, if what is gone before is satisfactory on the whole,
we should proceed in the same direction. Therefore I think
it is an unfortunate circumstance that the Government had
to depart in this matter and other matters from the prin-
ciple of the Act of 1832. The Chancellor of the Exchequer
seems to have great ambition for novelty and originality.
But everything new and everything original is by no
means good. The Act of 1832 was good in many respects.
It was simple with regard to the franchise; and now, after
35 years' experience on the part of revising barristers, and
the decisions of the courts, and seeing that everybody un-
derstands what is meant, we should avoid creating new
disputatious, and prevent groat trouble and expense.
(Hear, hear.) I have treated this question, as the hon.
gentleman says, as a practical question. It is not a matter
into which a man should introduce heated controversy.
It is the simple question whether you believe your coun-
trymen qualified for, as they believe they are entitled to,
the franchise, and whether you consider it is necessary
they should be three years before they are placed upon the
register. There might be a man amongst this class who,
though not very distinguished, might be ono of the most
honourable citizens in the country, and he would be three
years, perhaps four, before he would be admitted to the
franchise. What is the object of this limitation? 1
think throughout the country, and oven on your own
party, there would be great satisfaction if the House would
accept the amendment of my hon. friend. (Hear, hear.)
The SOLICIT OR-GENERAL rose to speak as a consi-
derable number of hon. members were leaving the House
and was in consequence imperfectly heard in the gallery.
He did not pretend to be in the secrets of the house, or
even of his own side of the house; but he believed this to
be a question open to fair discussion. The municipal fran-
chise had nothing to do with the matter. The question
was whether there was to be any test at all ; and by the
committee which had been referred to, and of which Lord
Grey was chairman, it was considered expedient, not only
that tests, but that strict tests, should be preserved. At
the present time there was a particular franchise. Ten-
pound heuseholders had the right to vote under a parti-
cular franchise. It was now proposed to enfranchise a
large number of persons under different conditions; but
all would exercise it on the same ternis. There were cer-
tain restrictions, but they were not imposed for the pur-
pose of disqualifying. They are imposed to test whether
those persons are fit and proper to exercise the franchise.
Mr. G. DEN3IAN, who rose amid loud cries of
"Divide," which for some time rendered him inaudible,
said ho considered this a most important point in the his-
tory of Reform. The Solicitor-General had made a speech,
which was a good argument for trying it on ; but it went
no furthor. The proposal of the Government was objec-
tionable on two grounds. Ono was that the electors
who were proposed to be enfranchised under this bill
were men who could feel justice and injustice. If the
bill made it necessary for a £9 voter to reside three years
while a £lO voter could get his vote by a residence of two
years, it would not settle the question for a single month
—(hear, hear)—for it would be a mere commencement of
agitation on the subject. The Government would be
playing the best card they could for the Liberal party if
they adhered to such a proposition. He trusted if the
Government did adhere to it they would be defeated ; but
if they defeated the amendment, it would be in such a
manner and with such a result as to be fatal to their own
positionin the country as persons affecting to settle the
question of reform.
The committee then divided, the numbers being :
For the amendment
••• 278
Against it 197

Majority against the Government 81
A few cheers arose on the Liberal side of the houe,o when
the paper on which the numbers were recorded was handed
to Mr. Ayrton, indicating that the amendment had been
carried. Those cheers became hearty when the numbers
were declared.

On the motion that the words " twelve calendar
months" be here inserted,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER rose and
said—After the decision at which the committee has ar-
rived, it is n•lt in my power, without further consultation
with my colleagues, to proceed with the bill which is now
in committee ; therefore I must move that you, Mr. Dod-
son, report progress, and ask leave to sit again.
This motion was put by the chairman amid cries of "No,
no," followed by et ies of "greed."
On the motion being put a second time,

Mr. GLADSTONE rose and said—There were voices
which cried together in the negative. I confess it appears
to me, the right hoa. gentleman having declared that the
decision the committee has arrived, at requires considera-
tion on his part and that of his colleagues, it would be
impossible for us to attempt to proceed further to-night.
I therefore say "Aye" to the motion.
The motion was then agreed to, and the committee was
postponed to Monday.
The house then resumed.
CORRUPT PRACTICES AT ELECTIONS.

On the motion by the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
for the second reading of this bill,
Sir G. GREY commented on a bill of so much import-
ance being read a second time without any statement on
the part of the Government. He would not opposo the
motion, but he should reserve to himself the right to
make any statement he thought fit on the next stage of
the bill.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he
would not press the motion for the second trading against
the wish of the house ; but it would be rather convenient
to take tLe discussion at a subsequent stage.
The motion was then agreed to, and the bill read a
second time. Monday was fixed for going into committee.
After some discussion the Metropolitan Gas Bill was
read a second time, and committed pro firma with a view
to its being reprinted, and eventually referred to a select
committee.

Thu Pitlaic Health (Scotland) Bill was read a second
Oran.

The Factory Acts Extension Bill and the Hours of
Regulation Bill were read a second time, and ordered to
be referred to a select committee.

The Local Government Supplemental Bill was passed
through committee.

A number of other orders were postponed.

J u counnitteo of the whole house leave was given to the
Chairman to bring in a bill to allow warehoused British
spirits to be bottled for home consumption.
The house adjourned at nine o'clock.

NEW POLICE COURT AT LA3IBETIL—It is under-
stood to be the intention of Government to provide a new
police court at Lambeth. The present court has served
more than twenty years, and the officials, ae well as the
public, require hltter accomin9datioz