The Sun.
London, England, 1867-05-31 00:00:00

the report of the commission that is Totnes, where the
total number on the register was 421, there wero 153
bribers and bribed, or 38 per cent.; in Reigate, 912 on the
register, and 346 bribe's and bribed, or 38 per cent ; in
Yarmouth, 1,647 on the register, and .528 bribers and
bribed, a little less than 32 per cent. And we 'crust bear
in mind that this is not the first time Yarmouth has been
before us. (Hear, hear.) On a former occasion the house
passed a measure of disfranchisement of the freemen, who
contribute very highly to the category of guilt on occa-
sions like this. In Lancaster, there were 1,493 voters on
the register, and 916 bribers and bribed, or G 4 per cent.
But it is only fair to say that out of 930 freemeir, 708 are
corrupt; and out of 439 householders, nearly as many. Ho
could not agree in the wish these cases had been dealt with
in a separate bill. In this country, in a case of this kind
we generally push a good principle to excess. In the re-
gard for the sacredness of private rights, which is the
foundation of law and order, we are sometimes apt to fal-
low mere phantoms and simulacra of right which we fall
down and worship, as if they corresponded substantially
with that definition; and sometimes real public right is
sacrificed to imaginary private right. (Hear, hear.) Ho
could not agree with the lion. member for Birmingham
that we are unable to deal impartially with this subject
on the present occasion, for the number of seats to be had
from each borough is not likely to blind our view with
regard to the general question of the redistribution of
seats. He trusted that the Government will accede to the
motion of the hon. member for Wick, or some such motion
with regard to the redistribution of seats. He supported
this clause on this principle, that local communities must
in a case of this kind be held responsible for the acts of
large portions of its members. (Cheers.) And that proposi-
tion is strengthened when you recollect that in all these
cases, besides the number of individuals whose corruption
you prove, there is a further percentage of corruption
which you fail to prove, and beyond and above that, be-
sides those who are actually tainted with bribery in com-
munities where it has unhappily prevailed, there are others
who wink and laugh at bribery, and make light of it, and
by conniving participate. (Hear, hear.) Nodoubt there are
many honourable, upright, and perfectly clean-handed men
who are indignant at such acts, but the proportion of such
innocent persons is not so large as upon an indulgent con-
struction of the case we might suppose. The question in-
volved by this clause is a very serious one. With regard
to the question of bribery, above all others, we are apt to
beat about the bush. There is nothing so easy as to make
speeches in favour of severe lawi against those who take
bribes--and there is nothing so delightful to au excited
audienceas to hear denunciations of those who give bribes
-but our severe penal enactments aro almost wholly in-
sufficient for the purpose. It would be ludicrous to profess
to abolish bribery by severe penal enactments against per-
sons in their individual capacity. He admitted that the
plan of dealing with local communities is open to the oh-
jectien that if they aro disfranchised on evidence obtained
largely from them, this may check tho disposition in future
to give such evidence. (Hear, hear.) But, on the other
hand, the evidence is reduced to absolute inutility, if on
that account, having made an investigation at the public
charge, you refuse to act upon it. (Cheers.) The
punishment of communties is likely effectually to check
all bribery. We shall create a public opinion in these
local communities adverse to bribery-(hear, hear)-
and it is this, as well as the exercise of influ-
ence and example, to which we must chiefly look for this
discouragement of brib. ry. (Hear, hear.) He could not
fur a moment defend any one who, in his ambition to ob-
tain a seat in Paeliament, has been led to taint himself in
connection with these transactions; but how does it arise?
Not because the candidates have such an avidity for ex-
penditure that they ere determined to force bribery upon
the communities-(laughter)-but because, misled by the
brilliancy of their object, they fall into the operation of a
system ingrained in these communities, mixed up with
their local habits and practices for a length of time. (Hear,
hear.) It is there the source of the evil lies, and there
you must attempt to purify it by the purge of great
severity, if you intend to make any serious effort to re-
form. (Cheers.) Therefore he was anxious this clause,
or one highly stringent in its enactments, should be
passed. (Hear, hear.) He was not prepared to say ho
did nos wish to draw distinctions between small and large
communities in this matter. Large communities are at
present without a cheek which operates upon small com-
munities. The latter know they will be disfranchised. Is
there a man that will stand up for Totnes ? (Laughter.)
But there is a latent sense of the importance of largo
communities which tends to weaken the operation of
checks. (Hear, hear.) Consequently we must be pre-
pared to deal with large communities upon nearly the
same principle as small communities -(cheers) -subject to
this exception, that if a community, which has no title to
representation except the fact that it has possessed that
right, abuses that right, there is no argument rernainins
to be made in such
,a case. He hoped the Government
will adhere to the stringent measures they had proposed.
(Cheers.) He could not conceive a worse proposal than
that made by the honourable member fur Montrose, for
taking away one of the members for a borough which has
a double representation. It is perfectly clear that,
whatever punishment you inflict, you must break the
habit of bribery. You may do this by total dis-
franchisement, or by disfranchisement for a term
of years; but to adopt this proposition would be
equal to saying, " You have taken bribes from two mem-
bers, and this is so intolerable that we can b;sar it no
longer; but wo have no objection to your taking bribes
from one member." (Laughter.) He gave the Govern-
ment great credit for the decisive course which they had
adopted as far as this proposal is concerned, and he hoped
the house would resolutely support them, and ho trusted
that the Government themselves will be worthy of the
proposal they had made. (Cheers.)
Mr. H. BAILLIE (who was unable for several seconds
to obtain a hearing in consequence of the calls for Mr.
Lowe, who rose about the same time) said that, inasmuch
as wo were not living under a Mosaic dispensation-(loud
laughter)-he did not see why we should assume the
power of visiting the sins of the fathers for successive
generations upon their children. (Hear, hear.) It would
be more just to suspend the rights of corrupt boroughs for
ten or fifteen years-(no, no)-and this would be a -more
severe punishment than that proposed for Lancaster, as
under the Government Reform Bill, the electors, though
di.,franchised for the borough, would become county
electors.

Mr. LOWE wished that the hon. member for Norfolk
(Mr. Howes) would make the discussion more regular by
moving to leave out the borough of Yarmouth from the
preamble. (Hear, hear.) He wished to call to the mind
of the house certain considerations which had not been
brought prominently before it. Rather less than a third
of the electors of Yarmouth are proved to be guilty of
corrupt practices. And if it were so, that the case
stands now as it did when the offences were committed,
or when the commission reported, or the Government
introduced the motion, he should have no difficulty in
voting for the disfranchisement of the borough. But
the case does not stand so now. Since that time we
had gone through a revolution. (Cheers.) The prin-
ciple upon which the franchise was to be conferred was
that it wss a privilege or trust, or agency deputed to
certain places which were thought fit to exercise it
for a public good. The principle upon which it was
now c,.ferred, phrase it how we may, was the right of
every citizen who had a settled residence in the country
to be represented in Parliament—(hear, hear)—and there-
fore they should well consider whether the principle in
respect of bribery, which was applicable in the pagt, could'
be applied to the now state of circumstances of the coun-
try. If they took the gross number of inhabitants in any
particular borough and divided it by seven, they would
arrive at what new constituencies will be. Applying that
rule to Great Yarmouth, its constituency of 1,650 will be
increased by something lilt 4,5.00 voters. The right hon
gentleman the member for South Lancashire said tliai
they should punish the innocent with the guilty. Granted;
but upon what principle ? Wore they going, because of
the fault of 500 voters, to prevent coming into being 4,500
electors, who otherwise would be admitted to the fran-
chise under the bill ? (Hear, hear.) It was said that they
would contaminate the new v tors; but was it to go forth
that the House had no confidence in the new constituen-
cies? (Hear, hear.) Was the House prepared to admit
that they were not to be entrusted with the franchise?
There was another consideration. Tho right hon. gentle-
man the member for South Laueashire argued that the
s'ze of the borough had nothing to do with the question ;
but if they laid down that rule, lie fancied that they would
end by disfranchising all the borough constituencies in
the country. (Rear, hear, and laughter.) He had no par-
ticular sympathy with transactions such as those which
took place at Great Yarmouth, but as he was convinced
that, as in America, wo shall have to wink at bribery in
the new coustituencies, he thought the House should act
warily in the matter-not as if they were at the fag. end
of an old system, but at the beginning of a new one. It
would be of evil augury for the plan which they were
about to establish if they were obliged to commence in the
first case of flagrant delinquency by an absolute reversal
of the precedent which they were asked to lily down in
the disfranchisement of Great Yarmouth. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. HOWES contended that a system of disfranchise-
ment, if carried iudiscrimivately into effect, was one of the
worst things that, coald be devised.
Mr. DELIGHT said that whatev,r opinion hon. members
might hold upon the question, they would all find that it
was very unfortunate for a fair discussion and determina-
tion of it that the case :of the four boroughs should be
rought before the House on a clause in a bill of such mag-
nitude. lie b Ilieved that since the 11..fsmin Act of 1832
:rely two boroughs, Sudbury and St. Albans, had been dis-
ranchised ; but he ventured to say that if those boroughs
lad been of the size of Lancaster and Great Yarmouth they
lever would have been disfranchised. They wore dis-
ranchised, in the first place, because they wore so small
hat they ought not to have existed at all; and, secondly,
because being so small, there was no expectation that there
could be created iu them any constituency of a less cor-
rupt and more reliable character; so that their representa-
tion in the future wenn be satisfactory and creditable to
the country. What was the true course in the case before
thorn. This—to disfranchise every individual elector,
whose corruption had been proved. Their names were
known ; they were on the table. (ilea .) The proposition

of the Government was that the four thousand innocent
should be punished with the five hundred guilty ; but the
' proposition was so monstrous that he was surprised the
Chancellor of the Exchequer should have put it in the bill ;
he was astonished that the right hon. gentleman the mem-
ber for South Lancashire should have supported it, and he
should be amazed if it received the sanction of the house.
(Wear.) His hon. friend and relative would forgive him for
referring to what had taken place in Wakefield. At the
general election of 1859 it was found that extensive bribery
prevailed in that borough, and one of the most honourable
and conscientious men living, having unfortunately come
in contact with the system, had almost become inex-
tricably involved in it. (Loud laughter.) If there
were no honourable and conscientious men who had been
connected with bribery, he could only say that be should
form an unfavourable opinion of many he saw around him.
(Renewed laughter.) But the committee knew what took
place in the case of Wakefield. There was a commission
and a full inquiry, but the borough was not disfranchised.
When the next election came round his hon. friend and
relative determined to have nothing more to do with it ;
but the constituency having felt that they had suffered from
what had taken place, entered into an agreement to return
him without canvass and expense, and gave a pledge at the
same time not to resort to bribery. The result was that the
borough of Wakefield was restored and bribery discon-
tinued as far as the party of his hon. friend was concerned.
The right hon. gentleman then referred to the boroughs
disfranchised in schedule A, but those boroughs were dis-
franchised on the ground of general policy, because they
wore not in any sense a representation of the people, and
that thou, members should be given to large towns and
cities, whore they would represent a considerable amount
of public opinion. The right course in the present case
would be what had been suggested—that the writs shciuld
be suspended. (Cries of "No, no.") There was no man in
the house to whom corruption was more odious than to
himself ; but he would never consent that many hundreds
of innocent men should be perpetually disfranchised, and
the great population of Lancaster and Yarmouth perpetu-
ally excluded because a small number of electors in one
generation had been guilty of the offence.
Viscount CRANBORNE thought there was danger of
the committee being misled by the term "disfranchise-
ment" If they said to the people of Yarmouth that they
never should have any share in the representation of the
country, in that case the punishment would be out of pro-
portion to their guilt.
Mr. H. VIVIAN said he would support the clause, as he
believed there was a desire on the part of a large number
of the respectable inhabitants of Great Yarmouth that the
borough should be disfranchised.
Mr. P. WYNDIIAM made a few observations which
wore not intelligible in the gallery owing to the loud and
constant cries of "Divide" on both sides of the house.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
the Government had not proposed the present clause
without the most mature and anxious consideration, and
the conviction that it was ono which was justified by
sound policy. The charge of the hon. member for Bir-
mingham, that the Government were proceeding in the
present course because it suited the convenience of their
other arrangements, had no foundation in justice. (Hear,
hear.) On the contrary, they were anxious that the
clause, if carried, should be carried by the general sense
and feeling of the committee; as it was only by such
means that it would have the moral effect which it was
desirable it should produce. The more he considered the
question of bribery and corruption the more firmly was ho
convinced that the practice had very little effect upon the
fortunes of parties, however it might gratify the ambition
and vanity of individuals who wished to force their way
into a position into society. (Hear, hear.)
After a few words of explanation from Mr. Bright, the
amendment to omit the words " Great Yarmouth" was
negatived without a division.
The CHAIRMAN then put the preamble of the clause.
The committee tLen divided, when there were
For the preamb1e.........825
Against

Majority ... —276
Colonel PATTEN then roved to omit Great Yarmouth
and Lancaster, with a view of moving at the end of the
clause that the writs for those boroughs should be sus-
pended for ten years. This ho submittted would ba
punishment enough.
Mr. ACLAND suggested that the period of suspension
should be 23 or 30 years, and Mr. BAXTER that it should
be 15 years.
Mr. GLADSTONE observed that if mercy were ex-
tended to any of those boroughs it ought to be extended
to Reigate. If the suspension were to be continued till
1887 ho should support it.
Lord CRANBORNE pointed out that by suspending the
writs they would not turn these electors over to the county
constituency, but they would not be represented at all.
The discussion was continued for some time longer, Mr.
Ayrton, Mr. Cubitt, Mr. Gurney, the Solicitor-General,
and Mr. Cardwell arguing iu support of the clause, and
Sir G. Bowyer, the Marquis of Hartington, Mr. Gilpin, and
Mr. Dillwyn supporting the amendment. Mr. Read pro-
tested against the constituency of East Norfolk being con-
taminated by that of Groat Yarmouth being added to it,
and Mr. Wyld suggested that instead of disfranchisement
they should try the ballot.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER contended
that the policy recommended by the Government was the
right policy. The mere suspension of tho writs would be
looked upon by the country as mere trifling. He believed
a great effect would be produced by disfranchising those
boroughs.
On a division the amendment was rejected by 159, to 87,
and tho clause as amended was agreed to.
THE REPRESENTATION OF MINORITIES.
On clause 9, which enacts that the boroughs mentioned
in Schedule A shall return one member of Parliament,
Mr. MILL proposed au amendment, which he said was
intended to embody a principle not yet introduced into the
discussion, overlooked by the constitution, and disregarded
in most theories of political reform ; yet of great impor-
tance. Tho proposal will not give a weapon of attack or
defence to any party ; it is neither democratic, aristocratic,
Tory, Whig, nor Radical; bat partakes somewhat of
all these qualities. It is to give fair play to all opinions of
all parties, so that none may bear down another, Ho
should assume the existence of a serious evil requiring a
remedy; and that this remedy would be practicable and
efficacious. The evil is, that the electors already on the
register aro not represented. The representation about
the extension of which the house is inquiring
is most imperfect and insufficient ; and this is
what is offered to the new classes of electors. An enor-
mous proportion of those who are qualified to vote con-
sists of minorities, not directly represented at all, but
blotted out of the constituencies during the duration of
iwhichnTdheeflyntcaiht
eenyp
en
cannot,
it,aododnbeen
et
as t
minoritieshemPui
much
rhl iaa sm:
if they
tht
eeny in
blottedw theere de
ilout
qualified.
i ofno r of
average, be less than one-third, and sometimes approxi-
mate to one-half of the constituencies. Even the majori-
ties are.represented only in a rough way. Their represen-
tative really only represents their party. This is not
enough. We want in the House of Commons not only a
sufficient number of Conservatives and Liberals, but the
best persons and representatives of their respective parties,
The elector desires to be represented by the person who
has most of his confidence in more than party matters.
How many electors in this country are represented by the
persons they would most prefer? Not one. (" Oh, oh,"
and cheers.) Well, the only electors who are so repre-
sented are those who have been bribed. A candidate's suc-
cess is determined sometimes by his being first in the field;
sometimes by his having been defeated at a previous elec-
tion ; but most commonly by local leaders, who may bo
honest politicians, or jobbing intriguers—(no, no, and, hear,
hear)—who like the gentleman who is willing to pay most
money. (Loud cheers and counter cheers.) It answers best
to put up some person who has no opinion but those of
party, for if he has any others they will probably cost some
votes. (Hoar, hear.) Having made out a sufficient case
—(laughter, and hear, hear)—of the evil to be currected,
he would state the remedy. His proposal was that votes
shall be taken in every locality for other than the local
candidates ; that those electors who decline to vote for any
of the three or four candidates in their locality should have
the power to bestow their votes on any one who is a can-
didate anywhere else. (Prolonged laughter.) The natural
result will be that the elector will vote for the person among
the whole number of candidates who represents him best;
and when a certain number of votes have been given for a
that this plan would destroy the local character of rapre-
candidate, be will bci declared duly elected. It is objected
sentation. (Hear, hear.) But the feelings and opinions of
as these feelings
elocalitieses wt
the
eu lmd
ibuod
sr eopfretslel
en tee;
el
must reside in a locality. Cut in certain districts a majority
gstoorsl,onagnd as every elector
of the electors will always prefer to be represented by some
one connected with them by some special tie. It will be
minorities, who know they cannot obtain local representa-
tion, who for the most part will avail themselves of the
new plan. With regard to the majority, the effect would
be to induce local leaders to bring forward the best fecal
candidates who can be obtained, because voters having
the power to carry their votes elsewhere, would demand a
candidate deserving of their votes. Let every elector
have the option of registering hims..lf, either locally or
generally ; let borough elections take place on the local
register, and let those electors who register them-
selves as members of a national constituency- have
members allotted in due proportion to their numbers,
and let those only be voted for on the new principle. To
prevent a few popular names getting all the votes, 3,000
might be the minimum number of votes necessary to
secure the election of a candidate; but all votes regis-
tered above this number fur a certain candidate would be
lost, unless each voter was permitted to put on his vating
paper the name of a second candidate fur whom his vote
might be used if it were not wanted for the first candi-
date. This is all the voter will have to do more than at
present, the only person on whom additional duty will
devolve being the scrutineer. He had given a simple, true,
and sufficiently full explanation of what many of you have
heard about, but which very few know much about—(hear,
hear, and laughter)--the plan of personal representation
of his eminent friend Mr. Hare. (Hoar, hear.) Is a re-
presentation of parties all we have a right to demand ? If
that were the case, it would be as well to set up three