The Sun.
London, England, 1867-02-26 00:00:00

stinacy of William M. which prevented the members of
the Executive Government being excluded from this
house ; but they remained on the condition that they
should be responsible for their acts just as if they did not
sit here—that the duties of members of the Executive
Government shculd not be absorbed in their duties as
members of Parliament, and that Parliament should not
use its power of making and unmaking Governments in
order to coerce the liberty of the Executive department.
The true principle is, that the Executive Government
must continue responsible, and in order to do so they
must continue free. What does the right hon. gentleman
propose ? With a deal of candid courtesy he beseeches
us—in language which I was ashamed to hear addressed
to me as a 658th part of the house, and that he should
have thought it necessary to address to the house—he
says, " If the house will deign to take us into its counsel
if it will co-operate with us in this matter, we shall re-
ceive with cordiality, with deference—nay, even with
gratitude—any suggestion it likes to offer. (Laughter.)
Say what you like to us, only, for God's sake, leave us
our places." (Laughter and cheers.) Well, sir, I think
that the supplication of the right hon. gentleman ought
not to be granted. This house ought to hold the Govern-
ment to the responsibility which Governments undertake
in regard to all measures, and especially with regard to
organic changes of the Constitution. I deprecate the
course of going into committee with the understanding
that the Government is not responsible for anything it
proposes—any member being left to move anything he
pleases, without the hand of a party leader to restrain him.
It amounts to putting the British Constitution into a kind
of alembic, and taking the chance of what comes. (Laugh-
ter.) I consider it an unwise, dangerous, unconstitutional
course. If I have enlarged upon this question, it is not
from a spirit of hostility to the Government, or with a wish
to get them into trouble, but to point out to the house the
dangerous consequences which may ensue to the country ;
and I may say this the more independently from the posi-
tion which I occupy with respect to the Government and
the Opposition, between which I stand, very happily, im-
partial—if you throw the whole question abroad with no-
body to guide or to be responsible. It puts me in mind of
what happened to the children of Israel when they threw
all their golden ornaments into the fire, and, as the expres-
sion is, "there came out of it this calf." (Loud laughter.)
I must say here a word for myself and some other members
of this house. We were very hard with our strictures
upon the right hon. gentleman the member for South Lan-
cashire last year; and before I allude to that further, will
the house allow me to make an apology which is due to the
right hon. gentleman ? In a letter which I wrote some
time ago to the Times, I stated, being in the country, and
trusting too much to my memory, that the right hon. gen-
tleman made an apology to me in the house for certain
things which ho said. I am very sorry to say I was mistaken.
Any one referring to page 125 of the right hon. gentleman's
speeches will see there was an apology made to me, but
on another matter. I misrepresented the right hon. gentle-
man, and I am sorry for it. (Hear, bear.) We were very
hard on the right hon. gentleman last year. We said he
treated us with reserve, though his reserve was openness
itself compared to the miserable instalments of information
dealt out to us by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. (Cheers.)
We said we must have the whole matter before us, and we
stuck to our text. But the right hon. gentleman (the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer) asks us to vote these Resolutions
without having tho Government measure in any way before
us, except iu what ho has said to-night, to which the Go-
vernment is not bound. He has not asked for leave to
bring in a bill, and it is perfectly competent for him to
come down to-morrow, and say he has changed his mind.
(Hear, hear, and no, no.) I beg therefore to press upon
the house the extreme inexpediency of going on with these
Resolutions. What possible good can result ? Though
we vote them all in a' lump, what can we do but disgrace
ourselves ? They do not form the basis of a bill, and so
far from preserving the Government, they would be a trap
for them. I consider that it is the business of the Execu-
tive Government to lead and advise the house, and it is
the business of the house to decide on the acts of the exe-
cutive. And if the house allows itself to take the initia-
tive, if it begins measures which the Government ought to
begin, it will only take away the responsibility of the Exe-
cutive Governmeht. It will lower the position of the house
in the country, and it will be treading, as it seems to me,
in the path which has been fatal to so many legislative as-
semblies before. In the history of the world never was
there known such an assembly, with the power of the Com-
mons of England, that had the moderation to confine itself
to its own legitimate functions, and to abstain from using,
or rather abusing, its power to coerce the Executive Go-
vernment; and when we abandon the safe course of mode-
ration, wo shall be in a fair way to transform this great
legislative instrument into something of the nature of a
convention, and of reducing the Government to the posi-
tion of clerks to take our directions, instead of men who
guide and lead us, and form the connecting link between
us and the sovereign on the one side, and the great public
on the other. Once more, I press upon the house to weigh
well the proceeding before they consent to go into com-
mittee upon these Resolutions. The proceeding is abso-
lutely useless. I defy any one to suggest any useful pur-
pose it will answer, but it may drift us no one knows
where. I do not wish to take a course hostile to the Go-
vernment; but whatever may be done by other members, I
must say " No" to the motion that you, sir, leave the chair.
I was anxious to say one word about myself in reference to
this question of Reform. The house is aware that I have
taken up this view of Reform—that I considered that the
burden of proof is on those who attack existing institutions,
and that I was bound to hold by them until something
better is shown. I believe that I stand alone in that view,
but I have never been favoured with an answer to it. The
argument was this way—" How can you say that Reform is
not wanted, when I have got a bill of my own in my
pocket, which I have prepared upon the subject ?" All I
can now say is, that I am not going to weary the House
any more by contending for ground which I have endea-
voured unsuccesfully to sustain, and that I am quite
ready to go most heartily and honestly to the considera-
tion of any bill on reform that is laid before us—(cheers)
—with every willingness and disposition to do all I can
towards making it an efficient and useful measure. I
think the condition that we aro in is exceedingly serious.
It was said at the last Reform Bill that • we were within
twenty-four hours of revolution. I believe wo have
been within fewer hours even than that of household
suffrage. (Cheers and laughter.) Now, sir, 1 am not
going to argue the question, but I believe a great
many hold household suffrage in very considerable dread.
It was because I, too, hold it in dread, that I opposed
the Uovernment bill of last year; for I believe that what-
ever point you select between the present franchise and
household suffrage will be a very temporary dwelling-
place indeed. Those, of course, who aro satisfied with
household suffrage, or who believe that they find a resting-
place at £6, to them I have nothing to say ; but those who
think otherwise I beg earnestly once more to consider this
question. It appears to me that the principle of a fancy
franchise is in itself a bad one, because what I understand
by a fancy franchise is an arbitrary connection between
two things which have no necessary connection with each
other. My nodon of the proper view is that we should go
a little deeper into the question, and try if we cannot find
some better principle than that. It does seem to mo that.
if we are to invent new machinery for determining
who shall have a share in the government of the
country. you ought to consider, not a man's property,
or his status, but you ought to consider his relation to
that State of which he is to be made a full citizen, and
that the principle you should seek should be a principle
drawn from the exercise of duties towards the State. I
hold that the proper foundation for the franchise should
be the performance and discharge of State burdens.
(Hear, hear.) It seems to me, when a man is so
poor that ho is excused on the ground of poverty from
performing any duty or discharging any burden to the
State, that such a man, although he is entitled to all the
rights of a citizen, is yet not in a condition t
entitle him to impose burdens upon others. I think
further that it is necessary that a Reform Bill should
not attach to any particular kind of property ; in
other words, that you should have some principle which
would take in tbosa above the line of £lO, as well as
those below it. It also seems to mo that there is this
serious omission in the proposals of Government—that they
take no notice of that most important question of lodgers ;
for if universal suffrage finds its way into this country, it
will be be through the lodger franchise. The more you
lower the franchise, the greater you make the disparity be-
tween the lodger and the householder; and every man is
either a lodger or a householder, unless ho sleeps under an
arch of London-bridge. Under such circumstances, the
lodgers will agitate, and so you will get gradually down to
a very low franchise indeed. How are all these things to
bo reconciled ? I think in a very simple manner. If you
retain the present franchise, and add all the payers
of income-tax, you will go a great way. If you
consider the tax too high for the purpose, you must lower
it. Look at the advantage you would get from it. You
would get the elite of all classes. You would admit a great
namber of the woeking classes, certainly the elite of them,
for £2 a week is by no means high wages for them ; and,
therefore, I believe that, if we were arguing thisquestion in
the Republic of Plato, there would be a great deal to be
said for that proposition. It does what it professes to do,
but no more. It •does not, under the form of asltnittting
persons to a voice in the constitution, give them the whole
power of the constitution. It admits the elite of the work-
ing class. A safeguard of the franchise by having a burden
attached to it, it follows necessarily that it corrects
the tendency to lower, because as you lower the
franchise the burden becomes more onerous. It is in the
direction of public burdens we should look for an enlarge-
ment of the franchise, and anxious as the house is for a
settlement, I trust there will be nothing like panic or pre-
cipitation. There was never less excuse for it. The meet-
ings over the country haveldied away, and only loft a few
echoes behind them. They have failed to take hold of the
mind of the nation. As for the metropolitan demonstra-
tions, they showed nothing but the vanity and impotence
of their authors. (Ministerial cheers.) It is not scarvesand
ribbons that will shake the foundations of an ancient monar-
chy. The country has remained unmoved. The possessors
of property are singularly well disposed towards a settle-
ment of the question. The agitators who go about the coun-
try preaching manhood suffrage will not be satisfied with

anything which we can do. Let us give up this compe-
tition between the two partiesas to who will bid the lowest
in the auction in in which the country is to be knocked
down to the one who proposes the swiftest elements for
its destruction. Let us4bid a long adieu to shams and pre-
tences ; let us deal more frankly, and call upon the Govern-
ment to withdraw their Resolutions, bring in a bill, and
bring the matter to an issue in the old English fashion.
There is no danger in such a course, but there will be
enormous danger if every member during the discussion on
those propositions is to bo pressed by his constituency,
while the press is hounding all on so as to bring .the insti-
tutions of the country down to the level of democracy.
(Ministerial cheers.) Touch the nettle timidly and it will
sting you, but grasp it firmly you are unhurt, and can tear
it at your leisure. (Cheers.)
Mr. BRIGHT—I am sorry the right hen, gentleman has
not taken some definite mode pf submitting his propositions
to the decision of the house, for I think there never were
propositions brought before it so involved in mystery, and
probably not a member opposite off the Treasury bench
knew what course the Government intended to take with
regard to thorn. lion. gentlemen believe beyond question
that the principal Minister in this house has led them into
a very ludicrous position. It is clear from the speech this
day fortnight and the speech to-night how much easier it
is to make a short speech and say something, or a long
speech and say nothing—to speak for three hours and say
nothing, or for one hour and say a good deal. The speech
of to-night, if delivered this day fortnight, would have
given us an opportunity of fairly passing to the propositions
of the Government. Probably up to Saturday last the right
hon. gentleman and his colleagues had not decided what
they wore to do with their propositions. The right hon.
gentleman comes forward with a statement now which puts
the Resolutions altogether out of place. (Hoar, hear.) Tho
law officers of the Government can put the propositions un-
folded by him into a bill in correct language which can be
laid on the table this day week. I agree, therefore, with
the right hon. member for Calne, to to go into a discussion
on the Resolutions would be merely a waste of time.
(Hear. hear.) But to go into the discussion of them in the
manner we wore invited to do this day fortnight would
tend to throw the question of Reform into a parliamentary
chaos, and lower the Executive Government in this house.
The right hon. gentleman flattered us a fortnight ago by
saying the House of Commons was superior to the legisla-
tive houses in other countries, and he instanced Washing-
ton. But I undertake to say no proposition introduced
during the last 24 years was more calculated to Ameri-
canise the House of Commons as a legislative assembly
than the propositions of the Government. (Cheers.)
The Senate and House of Representatives pass what mea-
sures they like, without consulting the Washington Cabi-
net, and if I understand the plan pursued towards those
who sit on the benches opposite, it is one for trying to re-
duce them to obedience to the views of the right hon. gen-
tleman. I think the Government should take the advice
of the member for Calne, and bring in a distinct and defi-
nite bill by this day week. What has become of all your
arguments against the right lion. gentleman tbo leader of
the Opposition ? Was not one of your first arguments that
the scheme ho submitted was crude and ill digested ? But
was there ever anything more ludicrously crude than the
propositions contained in the right hon. gentleman's R3SO-
- ? Did not every member opposite then say that it
was out of the question to discuss the measure of the right
hon. gentleman the member for South Lancashire until
the whole scheme was before them ? Hon. members oppo-
site applauded the speech of the noble lord the member for
King's Lynn as unanswerable, but if there was any answer
to it, it could only mean that the scheme of the late Go-
vernment could not be entertained until the house was in
possession of the entire scheme of reform. Hon. gent omen
opposite must find themselves in rather a curious position
to have been kept in the dark until half past two o'clock
to-day. At present I can only say for myself that when
the propositions shadowed forth by the right hon. gentle-
man are embodied in a bill, I shall take the first opportu-
nity of expressing my opinion on them. What is wanted
by the house and the country is a considerable franchise
extension. It is not denied that meetings have been held
at which hundreds of thousands of people, speaking in the
aggregate, have attended, and it is known that the uni-
versal sympathy of the working classes went with the per-
sons actually present at those meetings. They asked the
House of Commons that the barrier put up in 1832 shall
be thrown down, so that, as many demand, all may come
in, or, as others ask, that the barrier shall be lowered suffi-
ciently to make a sensible effect on the borough represen-
tation. The bill of the Government last year, at the wide-
est possible computation, proposed to admit 204,000 by the
repeal of the rate paying clauses; but what is now pro-
posed ? Instead of a£7 rental there is to be a£6 rating,
which will vary according to the system of assessment in
the different boroughs. (Hear, hear.) In some it may be
from £7 to £7105., but generally it will run from £7 to
£l.O. ("Oh, oh," from the Ministerial side.) It will not
be equal, throughout all the boroughs of England, to an
£3 rental. New franchises aro proposed, on which
large statistics are raised; but then it is assumed
that those will be now voters, wlt3n, in all probability,
those to be entitled by funded property, direct taxation,
and education, and many doubtless in the savings banks,
mutt, almost, as a matter of necessity, be entitled to have
votes at present. The computation, like that of 183'9, is
nothing but the loosest guessing. The right hon. gentle-
man has adhered to the decision of last year to take a rat-
ing qualification. He knew it was the best, but it served
his purpose, for it miss(' his party to power, the same who
now urge that the question is not to bo discussed in a party
spirit. (Cheers.) But when we come to the counties, why
has he not accepted the vote of Parliament of last session ?
(Hear, hoar.) When Parliament decided to reduce the
county franchise to £l4, why did ho not have the libe-
rality and manliness to carry out that decision likewise ?
(Cheers.) It is estimated that there may be an increase in
the boroughs of 130,000, and of 82,000 voters on the rate-
paying qualification. Aud then it is proposed to make these
childish new franchises from the saving banks and direct
taxation. By a bill now before the house, a ratcatcher who
keeps four dogs will pay 20s. of direct taxes, and will come,
of course, into one of the new constituencies which are to
save the country from destruction. (Laughter.) Will these
proposals settle, or do anything to settle, the question of
reform ? It is assumed that the house is unanimous for
something, and will have a Reform Bill—but there is an
essential difference, and a perilous one, between a Reform
Bill and a reform. More than a thousand public meetings
have been held since last session with open doors, and
every one with a unanimous vote for something much
larger and more complete. Hon. gentlemen opposite can-
not be anti-reformers now. (Laughter and cheers.) The
seasons of transformations is now nearly over at the
theatres ; but it is extended to the House of Commons.
(Laughter.) Last session no language was too violent to
apply to the moderato measures of the late Government—
now gentlemen will have to get up and unsay all that
was said. That is not a matter for quarrel—they have
as much right to change their opinion as the right hon.
.as
the member for Calne. The right hon. mem-
ber for Huntingdon still sits on the Treasury bench.
(Laughter.) Eight or nine years ago two of the col-
leagues of the right hon. gentleman went into the back
row. But now the members for Huntingdon and Stam-
ford, and the President of the Board of Trade, are all
before us as reformers. (Laughter.) lam very glad
you are reformers, and what is more, you will be very
glad of it yourselves hereafter, and your children,
when they look back upon the records of this Par-
liament will judge you the more favourably, the more
honestly, generously, and completely you do the work
which you now apparently are permitting your Ministers to
try to do. Last session I took the liberty of telling hon.
gentlemen opposite that, although they got rid of the bill,
and got rid of th 6 Government, they would not get rid of
reform, but they would have to meet and settle it with the
great people of the United Kingdom. Now they came down
to Parliament and try to settle it. Do not try to settle it
in any hocus pocus manner to which members in this house
may agree, but try to settle it with reference to the people
outside. They know that members of this house are not in
favour of a groat extension of reform. Neither the Govern-
ment now in nor the Government turned out would under-
take so great and dangerous a question if there had not
been pressure. Why, then, in the name of all that is sen-
sible and wise—why should we not attempt to step so far
forward as to meet the views, honest sympathies, and
desires of the great mass of the people now excluded ? If
you stick to this little bill, if you stick to this £6 rating
franchise, you but touch the lips and leave the palate dry.
The great body of the people will repudiate your measure ;
and I will venture to say that, in the first Parliament held
after an election under it, you will have a proposition made
to the house, certainly with regard to the franchise, and I
believe also with respect to the redistribution of seats.
(Hear, hear.) [The hon. gentleman here read a long ex-
tract from a speech delivered by Mr. Disraeli some years
ago, just before he was leader of the Conservative party,
C.mtending that it is almost impossible for a member in
office to undertake to carry a measure on any great ques-
tion which in opposition he had been consistently opposed
to.] Do not (Mr. Bright continued) imagine for a moment
if the Government are anxious either to carry a real, sub-
stantial, conclusive, and satisfactory bill, or aro ready to
support it, that I, although I ant not of their party, and they
have opposed all the propositions in which lam concerned,
should factiously oppose them. But having changed sides,
having become reformers, having decided at half-past two
to-day to allow the right hon. gentleman to appear in a now
character as a reformer in this house,—(no, no, cheers, and
laughter) —I ask you, for your own sake and for his sake,
and what is worth infinitely more than your reputation or
his position, for the interest of this great nation, and for
the satisfaction of an excited and anxious people —(oh, oh)—
that this measure, if it is to be passed this session, shall

be one at least that should release me and other members
who are in favour of Reform from further discussion, and
agitation of the question during our Parliamentary life.
(Loud cheers.)
After Mr. Bright concluded, and as Mr. Walpole, who
succeeded him, roso to address the house, a large number
of members left, and in the noise caused by their moving
the opening remarks of the Home Secretary wore imper-
fectly heard.
Mr. WALPOLE said the resolutions were not merely
abstract; for the house was bound to take them in con-
nection with the explanation of the Chancellor of the. Ex-
chequer. The present was a most favourable moment for

considering and settling the question ; and the right hon.
gentleman added that if the house went into committee
Ministers were prepared to stand or fall by what they con-
sidered the vital principles of their measure.
Mr. LAINtt objected to the proposals of the Govern-
ment as displaying a glaring want of finality. A house-
hold rating suffrage must, in his opinion, be at the basis of
any soletion of the question of Reform.
Mr. GLADSTONE, who, on rising, was received with
loud cheers, said—l don't propose to go over the contro-
versial portion of the ground which has been occupied
during this debate, in common by the right hon. gentle-
man the member for Caine (Mr. Lowe) and my hon. friend
the member for Birmingham (Mr. Bright). lam so far at
least glad that they have entered on that portion of the
discussion, because they have been the means of eliciting
from the right hon. gentleman the Home Secretary (Mr.
Walpole) an important declaration, which is supposed to be
entirely different from the declaration made by the right
hon. gentleman (Mr. Disraeli) in bringing forward these
resolutions. I don't assert the fact. I merely state that
the contradiction was supposed to exist. I beg, however,
to express my great satisfaction at learning from the right
hon. gentleman (Mr. Walpole)—l use as nearly as I can
his own words—that " it is the intention of the Govern-
ment to stand or fall by any of those principles which
they may feel vital to the settlement of this question."
That is an important declaration, because it shows that
the Government, conscious of the weight of this
question, will justly endeavour to fortify themselves
with all that authority which accrues to a Government
in the prosecution of such a subject, froth the know-
ledge that it stakes its existence on the issue. The
Chancellor of the Exchequer has laid before us with
considerable clearness the principal details of the plan of
the Government, and conveyed to the house that it is the
intention of the Government that we should be called upon
to proceed by the method originally indicated. I wish now
to know from her Majesty's Government on what infor-
mation they intend to sustain their estimates of the num-
ber of persons to be admitted to the franchise by the va-
rious changes contemplated. lam the more anxious to
know the nature of that information, because as to a cer-
,tain portion of the figures I listened with some incredulity.
The most important point of discrepancy between the
statement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the in-
formation 1 should have expected from him was with re-
spect to the numbers of persons to be admitted to the suf-
frage by lowering the £lO clear annual value to a £6 rating.
Last year we were in possession of figures carefully pre-
pared by the most competent authorities, and we endea-
voured to estimate as accurately as possible the number of
persons who would be admitted to the franchise by its re-
duction from £lO annual value to £6 rating. The right
hon. gentleman has stated that number at 130,000 ; but,
according to our calculations, it did not exceed 105,000.
The total amount of enfranchisement now proposed in
boroughs, as affecting the working classes, is 105,000. We
proposed, by reducing the £lO clear annual value to £7
gross estimated rental, by provision for compound house-
holders and lodgers, for the enlargement of the suffrage to
the extent of 200,000 persons substantially belonging to
the labouring classes ; and no figure was ventured upon as
the limit of the savings-bank franchise. In lieu of these,
the right hon. gentleman would admit little more 100,000.
I take the adoption of the £6 rating to be an addition of
100,000; the franchise for degrees will have no appreciable
effect on the labouring classes; that for .£5O in the funds
will have as little ; and with regard to that for deposits in
savings banks, while I am doubtful in many points about
it—especially in the form in which it is now for the first
time introduced, and asto whether he will get 35,000 men,
not faggot voters (hear, hear)—the number of artisans and
mechanics who deposit in those banks is very small.
Amongst that number are many domestic servants, the
most dependent of the class. The member for the Wick
burghs has referred to finality ; and he and the member
for Birmingham are not far distant in their views, for
the latter said our desire was to get rid of this subject
for the remainder of our lives. Last year we believed
that to make a liberal admission to tho franchise was
essential to anything like finality. We thought the
selection of ~the superiolportiou of the working classes
would have done for the working classes what the Reform
Act did for the middle classes. I know many minds in
this house were honestly dissatisfied with the measure—
(hear)—because of the want of a formidable barrier be-
tween those who should have the franchise and those who
had not. For this reason I ask the right hon. gentleman,
Does his extension of the franchise embrace only those who
are rated at sums over £6 or those rated at £6 and up-
wards ? (Hear.) if the latter, the proposal is precisely
in the same position as ours with regard to the want of
hedge or lino or barrier, and is open to the argument that
there is no security against its being carried further, and
by withdrawing a moiety of the extension offeredlast year
it offered a premium for continual agitation. (Hear.) The
right hon. gentleman evidently does not contemplate any
provision for compound householders and lodgers. There
is one part of his speech to which I must refer in terms of
satisfaction—the bold proposal with respect to certain cor-
rupt towns. (Hear.) I may doubt whether a loeg period of
disfranchiseniont might not have sufficed; but if her Ma-
jesty's Government makes a proposal for total disfraneise-
ment I shall not be the man to object to it. (Cheers.) The
right hon. gentleman must have derived some encourage-
ment from the warm and lively cheers he received from this
portion of the house to that passage of his speech. lam
very glad ho has given an engagement that the very im-
portant change ho contemplates in the law relating to
bribery and corruption shall not bo saddled on the bill for
the representation of the people. (Hear.) I fully agree
that proposals touching a matter of the utmost delicacy
connected with the rights and privileges of the members of
this house, which deserve the most careful and impartial
consideration—(hear)—and with regard to which party
spirit has never yet merged into view, should not be asso-
ciated with a subject which revives old controversies.

(Hear.) The object in view in the proposals with regard
to registration of voters in townships and diminishing the
distances voters have to travel is excellent; but the sub-
ject will involve much consideration and many difficul-
ties will have to be surmounted. I now comp to the ques-
tion of procedure. (Hear.) The right hon. gentleman
must have felt as truly remarkable the precise concurrence
of opinion between the member for Birmingham and the
membei for Calne. lam sure he does not suspect those
distinguished members of a corrupt collusion. (Laughter.)
Such manifestation, between gentlemen who are pretty
widely separated in opinion, and whose separation has
been accompanied by tolerably brisk political conflict, is
not mere accident, but a significant indication of the opinion
of the house. It was the Home Secretary who last session
launched this idea ; and he could not fail to observe that
he was not supported by the expressed approval of his own
party. It is intimately connected with the question of the
lapse of time, which, when we come to handle so gigantic
a subject in the limits of one session, is no longer secon-
dary. (Cheers.) If it is the conviction of the Government
that this is the best plan, I waive the objection ; but, if we
are to proceed by resolution, it must be by resolutions that
embody the plan proposed. (Cheers.) The Government
will be embarrassed by the terms of their own resolutions.
The resolution on the distribution of seats implies dis-
tinctly that whatever seats Government may have at dis-
posal will be given to new communities ; but the statement
now made divides them equally between new and old com-
munities, or gives a majority to old ones. The resolution as
to the predominance of class is in its abstract character
more like a proposition borrowed from the Oxford Debat-
ing Society than a proposition to be gravely submitted to
the Senate—(laughter)—and ill accords with the admoni-
tion in the Speech from the Throne with regard to charity,
moderation, and mutual forbearance. (Hear, hear.) Why
should the sore point of the question be touched—for what
practical purpose is the question raised, when the proposi-
tion foi a £6 rating franchise, and its reception by the
house, that distinctly and intelligibly define the manner in
which the distinctions of class are to bo disposed of, are free

from this objection ? What is the use of raising the ques•
tion in the abstraCt when you are to deal with it in the con•

crete ? (Cheers.) The Home Secretary recommended the
resolutions on the ground that the forms of the house and
the nature of the proceeding would coerce every man who
has an idea on the subject to produce it here. (Heat, hear.)
I should not have wished better than to have spoken that
passage of his speech against proceeding by resolution.
(Laughter.) These propositions are not the mere crotchets
of idle and light-minded men. Many of the most acute
intellects of the country have been busy with the question ;
and from the closet of the study have emerged many
schemes which would have to be debated with respect,
and could not be got rid of without long and intricate
discussion. Yet we are required to deal with the subject
not in committee on a bill, but on preliminary resolu-
tions which define almost nothing as to the nature of the
bill. (Hear.) I take it for granted there is no intention
to press any proceeding to-night. Tho position of the
house is fundamentally altered by the proceedings of this
evening, and its judgment ought to be loft entirely free.
The most convenient course will be to appropriate the next
Government night for the purpose. The interval which
may be claimed in the interest of members of the house
will have, I trust, its value for the Government. (Cheers.)
This house has never been called upon to discuss reso-
lutions necessarily of a vague character, and subject to
every kind of difference of interpretation, when beyond
them lies a clear and distinct plan. (Cheers.) It is a
position so novel that I cannot venture to prognosticate
what inconvenience might arise from it in the discussion.
If we had definite resolutions embodying the main pro-
positions of the speech of the right hon. gentleman, I
do not say we might not proceed to vote upon them,
rather than appear to obstruct the Government ; but I
hope we shall not go into committee on resolutions
such as these, which are compatible neither with the
dignity of the house nor with the desire to preserve and
vindicate the character and credit of the House of Com-
mons, which would be gravely imperilled if it woie seen
that wo did not exercise sound hnd strict judgment with
regard to all the steps by which we are to proceed to the
settlement of this subject. (Loud cheers.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said—l
will not now go into a lengthened discussion upon the
figures which have been oxen cised by the right hon.
gentleman. I will merely tell him that I shall tae pre-
pared to support the accuracy of the estimates which I
have made. 1 have the figures on which he made his