The Sun.
London, England, 1858-12-23 00:00:00

between 200 and 300, and the bulk of them have
only a very small body of electors, compared with
the larger towns and constituencies. And when you
have a very small number of persons together they
can hardly, to use a common expression, keep them-
selves warm together. They can't preserve their
independence. A neighbouring landowner, two or
three lawyers, two or three anybodies who choose
to combine and to act with a certain amount of
unity and subtlety will affect the representation of
one of those small boroughs ; and the members
who go up to the House of Commons from them are
often, and generally, not earnest men, anxious to
carry out any great popular principle, or any great
principle at all ; but the House of Commons is a
convenient club, a pleasant lounge, affords a nice
way of filling up the time of a man who has passed
through business, or being of the order that does
not like business, and has never had any business—
(laughter)—he wants something respectable, where
he may pretend at least not to be absolutely idle.
(Laughter and cheers.) Well, it follows from all
this that the general result of what we call our
Parliamentary representation is not found as yet a
guard of our public interests ; it does not respond
with any heartiness or any willingness to sthe
aspirations of the people for a better Government.
But it is found to be in sympathy, not with you,
but with the ruling class, and is infinitely more
careful to preserve monopolies and privileges than
the general interests of the great body of the na-
tion. (Cheers.) But to-morrow morning some-
body who is probably now sitting, or will be then,
pen in hand, will say, and perhaps with a show of
reason, that I am arguing entirely on a question of
magnitude of population. It is not true ; but still
he may say that, and say that in a country like this
numbers simply. should net decide these great ques-
tions, though there is a large space for improvement
between the condition of things I have pointed out
and thecondition my critic dreads. But he will
say property is to be taken into consideration at
least as well as, and perhaps before, population.
Let us take for a moment the test of wealth ; and,
as I am in Scotland, take a comparison of your two
foremost cities with some other portion of the coun-
try which enjoys, or possesses—l doubt if it does
enjoy—an unfair share of representation. Your
two cities of Edinburgh and Glasgow have a taxa-
ble property, taking Schedule Aof the Income-
tax and Property-tax, which means land and
buildings and property you can see, and Sche-
dule D, which means profits on trades and incomes
from professions, and so forth—a taxable pro-
perty to the amount of £7,800,000—1 leave out all
the odd sums. And there are 101 boroughs in
Great Britain and Ireland, and by no means the
smallest, whose taxable property is £7,434.000—
that is, some £350,000 less. Edinburgh and Glas-
gow, with the larger amount of that taxable pro-
perty, return together four members to the House
lof Commons ; and these other boroughs, with a
smaller amount, return no less than 126 members.
(Loud cries of Hear, hear.) Now, when I speak of
these boroughs as adding 126 members, let me
make this explanation. In the bill which Lord
John Russell, acting in Lord Aberdeen's Govern-
ment, brought before the House •of Commons in
1854, which, as you know, did not become law, he
proposed to disfranchise all boroughs with a popu-
lation of less than 5,000, and whose number of
electors was less than 300. Now, I have omitted
all these ; I have drawn the line even higher. I
believe if the line be drawn at 7,000 or 8,000, it
will still leave this amazing disparity, that
£7,800,000 of taxable property in Edinburgh and
Glasgow is represented by four members and a
smaller amount of taxable property in other
boroughs, leaving out these small boroughs of
which I have spoken, is represented by 126 mem-
bers in that house. Take one other illustration on
that point. The annual sum paid by the population
of Edinburgh and• Glasgow in taxes, including the
Income and Property-tax for the two schedules
referred to, including house duty, assessed taxes,
and land taxes—the whole of these taxes paid for
Edinburgh and Glasgow is £556,000, represented
by four members in Parliament ; and the whole sum
which the 126 members represent, of annual direct
taxes paid by their constituents is £562,000, being
only £ll,OOO more than Edinburgh and Glasgow.
Now, my investigation led me to this conclusion,
whether you take numbers, or industry, or wealth,
or what we comprehend as political indepen-
dence—l do not care by what test you choose
to try it—but you will come to the same startling
and, I would say, oppressive result, that these great
populations and interests are most inadequately
represented in the House of Commons under the
present system of representation. (Applause.)
Well, having got thus far, perhaps we shall all be
agreed with everybody else out of doors, as Mr.
Buchanan says we are, that we must have a change.
The question is, -what change ? I have a great
suspicion of those men who profess great anxiety
for something to be done, but constantly assail
those who are attempting to do something. (Great
cheering.) You are aware that less than two
months ago—some six or eight weeks ago—l had
the privilege of addressing on two occasions very
large meetings of my constituents in birmingham.
You recollect the sort of howl of astonishment—
(laughter)—with which—l do not complain of the
Tory papers, because they are constantly labouring
in their always unsuccessful vocation—(laughter)
—but I mean that was set up by papers that call
themselves Liberal, but who, by some means or
other, seem to be manacled to the triumph of 1832,
and, after living 26 years longer, do not appear to
be, if they are, even so far advanced as they were
at the time of the Reform Bill. (Cheers.) Well,
I am told that the sentiments that were so fright-
ful at Birmingham were very much moderated at
Manchester, ;and that at Edinburgh they were
almost, if notaltogether, thrown away. (Laughter.)
Well, now, I say to any of you who read leading
articles, and who invariably believe them—
(laughter)—and I have not the slightest doubt but
this sort of notion may prevail in some minds here
—I say that I believe it is impossible for any one
to compare those speeches at Birmingham with the
speech at Manchester, or the two or three with the
speech at Edinburgh, and to discover the smallest
possible abandonment of any one single sentiment
that I uttered on the first occasions. (Cheers.) Do
these men suppose that I have the effrontery to
stand before many thousands of my countrymen,
after days and weeks of notice that I am so to ap-
pear before them, and that I come there to speak
simply the temporary passion and sentiment of the
hour ? They little know, if they dream of this, the
sense of responsibility which I think every man
shoud speak under who offers himself on any
occasion as the expounder of the opinions
or the guide of the deliberations of his countrymen.
(Great cheering.) Nearly 30 years ago the senti-
ments that I have uttered upon this question of
Parliamentary Reform were proclaimed to thou-
sands of our countrymen by the late Lord Durham.
My opinions with regard to the franchise are not
novel. I stated in Manchester that they were but
the opinions which Fox uttered, and which Lord
Grey proposed to the House of Commons to adopt
in the year 1797. (Hear.) I am no conjuror, I have
got not specific for national happiness. I offer you
nothing made up of all sorts of conundrums and
tricks, but I bring before you what I believe to be
a rational and substantial project for the amendment
of our representation, which I venture to say has
had during the last 60 years the sanction and ap-
proval of the greatest minds and greatest patriots
of our country. (Cheers.) Well, then, what is this
change that is to swamp everybody, and that men
stand aghast at ? (Laughter.) It is that the elective
franchise, which now is confined, both in England
and Scotland, in boroughs, with some exceptions,
to the occupancy of a house of the yearly value of
£lO, shall be lowered so as to take in in reality all
the persons who are householders and occupiers of
premises rated to the relief of thepoor. Your system
of rating is much more modern in Scotland than
ours in England ; but I learn that, with two or
three most inconsiderable exceptions, it has now
become uniform throughout the whole of your
country. One reason why I propose this franchise
is this. Unfortunately, in this country —I mean
Great Britain and Ireland—there is a very large
class constantly requiring assistance from their fel-
low men. There requires to be levied all through the
kingdom a rate that does not amount to less—at
least, in 1856 it amounted tomore—than the sum of
seven millions. sterling, chiefly devoted, and in fact,
raised for the .express purpose of giving relief to the
indigent poor. Now, I think that one of your arti-
sans, let him be what he may in his particular walk
of life, who works hard from morning till night six
days in 'the week, finds heavy demands at home in
his own family; he
.is called upon tO per Win a all
the duties of citizenship, and to contribute from
his own earnings. 'to • the support •of some. feeble;
some sick—it may be, some dissolute and profligate
man who is not able to support himself—l think
that every man: who is thus called upon to pay
taxes from his weekly and annual earnings for such
a purpose, has some claim to be considered a citi-
zen, and to be admitted to the rights of citizenship.
(Cheers.) I have been asked, I am told—for I have
not had time to read half the attacks which, I
understand,
guilty of misrepresentation told that I have b
have been made upon me—but 'I am
tna t attackedion
in
stating
a at
isn
(p t
h
in England with retard '''
' havinge custom been
to the franchise.. 1 said
that in England, in our parochial governments, in
our Poor Law Unions and muniei al governments,
the system of rating and the scare of rtin form
the basis of the elective franchise, and I could see
no reason why they should not alsO form the basis
' f the franchise in the election of membersof '
o Par-
' liament Well, I am told that with regard to Poor
Law unions, in the. case of some parishes, but not
universally, themi.4 a mode of voting by which
men give vote's somewhat in proportion to their pro.