The Sun.
London, England, 1867-06-29 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS—YssTERDAr.

The SPEAKER took the chair at 2 o'clock.
THE REPRESENTATION OF TIIE PEOPLE BILL.
The House having gone into committee on this bill,
The AT T ORNEY-GENERAL moved a. clause providing
that notice should be sent to every ratepayer occupying
promises conferring the franchise, and that no rate should
be deemed payable until the expiration of seven clear days
from the service of such requisition or note.
Mr. MARS El objected to the clause on the ground that it
would have the effect of giving the overseer power to dis-
franchise anybody ho liked.
Mr. ROEBUCK also opposed the clause, but it was sup-
ported by several hon. members.
After some discussion the clause was agreed to without
a division.

Lord J. BROWNE moved at the end of the clause to add
"It shall be the duty of the overseer to make such demand
within a month from the publication of the rate, and if he
neglect to do so ho shall be liable to a penalty of 20s. in
each case."

Mr. Sergeant GASELEE said this would make the bill
ono of pains and penalties.
On the motion that the clauso stand part of the bill,

Lord CRAN BORNE observed that those from whom
the rates were not demanded would come upon the rates,
and the clause therefore conferred enfranchisement
without the payment of rates. The effect would there-
fore be to give a vote to the residuum who could not pay
their rates.

Mr. LOCKE thought the only course for the committee
to pursue was to leave the voters to be enfranchised by
this bill in the same position as the .£lO householders
now stood ; and if they negatived this clause that
would be the result. (Hear, hear.) By so doing they
would simply show the hon. member for Tiverton to be a
false prophet, because he had in a previous clause iuserted
the words "as hereinafter mentioned." Well, suppose they
did not mention anything at all. (Laughter.) No harm
would be done, and the unnecessary words would be struck
out on bringing up the report.

ROEBUCK made an appeal to the Government not
to proceed with the clause,which put into the hands of un-
educated men a tremendous power. (Hear, hear.) They
were taking a dangerous step, which would ruin the coun-
try by letting in the rabble of the people.
Mr. DENMAN little expected to be told that this was a
clause which would ruin the constitution. He must express
his surprise at the member for Southwark, who was a
lawyer, and ought to have seen that ho was taking a
most narrow and disfranchising view. In many boroughs,
no doubt, the overseers wore political partisans,
but ono party would not suffer more than the other.
Besides, no more would be given them than
they already possessed, because the overseer was
liable to account to the parish for the due payment of
the rates. The Attorney-General had done his duty in
bringing up this clause, which was fairly and honestly
drawn, and if the Government did not support it they
would be deceiving him and many other members.
(Oh, !)
Mr. G. HARDY remarked that the clause was brought
up at the suggestion of the hon. member for Tiverton, but
for himself he should prefer the present system of giving
notice of the rate, viz., by public notic3 on the church
doors.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the posi-
tion of the Government with reference to this clause had
been entirely mistaken. On the occasion when the hon.
member for Tiverton brought forward his suggestion there
WaS no doubt a majority of the house in its favour,
but the Government were opposed to it. Under the cir-
cumstances, however, the Attorney-General undertook to
draw up a clause which put the hon. member in the posi-
tion he would have occupied if a division had been taken
that night. But the opinion of the committee was now,
he believed, very different. The Government, however,
had fulfilled their duty.

_
Mr. GLADST O.NE observed that he understood from the
remarks of the right bon. gentleman that he would not sup-
port the clause on the motion being put from the Chair.
(No, no.) Re understood that from the language which had
been used, and which inyolydd the conduct of the Govern-

ment towards private members. Ho objected to the Go-
vernment accepting a proposal of la3private member, and
then for the Chancellor of the Exchequer—at least the
Home Secretary—to rise and state that he viewed the
acceptance or non-acceptance of the clause with perfect in-
difference. He would not take the decision of the com-
mittee as referring to the words inserted in the 3rd clause
at a critical period of the bill, and if the clause were thrown
out he must accept it as a re-opening of the whole ques-
tion of payment of rates, and the whole battle of the bill
would have to be fought over again.

After some observations from Mr. D. GRIFFITH,
The ATTORNEY-GENERALsabIhe L•lt bound tosup-
port the hon. member for Tiverton only so far as ho would
have done if his original amendment had been carried to a
division. It 3 should ae,;ordingly support the claus:, on
the pres,!nt occasion, but felt. himself at perf..ct liberty to
vote for its omission on the bringing up of the report.
Mr. DENMSN said he had been guided in leis conduct
towards the bill by the belief that the principle of his
amendment hid been accepted, but it was not for him to
say how or in what manner the Attorney-General should
rate.

After some furticr diEctusiou the committee divided,
when the numbers were—

For the clause
Against
Majority
Tho clause was accordingly negatived.
Mr. GLA.DSTGNE moved that progress bo reported,
and accused the Government of having violated its pro-
mise to the hon. member for Tiverton.
After some further discussion,

.. --`)

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER promised
under the circumstances to bring in a new clause.
The house adjourned at seven o'clock.
On reassembling at nine o'clock,
On the motion for going in committee of supply,

Mr. C. FORTESCUE moved " That this house consi-
ders it essential to the satisfactory settlement of the ques-
tion of Parliamentary Reform that there should be an
amendment of the law relating to the representation of the
people in Ireland as well as in the other portions of the
United Kingdom ; and considers it desirable that, in ac-
cordance with the promise of the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer, the Government should introduce their bill upon
that subject during the present session." The right hon.
gentleman urged that there was nothing in the condition
of Ireland could justify the abandonment of the Reform
Bill sine die, and that the policy of the Government in ig-
noring her legitimate claim to be put upon the same footing
with Scotland would cause wide-spread dissatisfaction and
disappointment.
The motion was seconded by Colonel FRENCH, and
opposed by Mr. CONOLLY, who, whilst expressing his wil-
lingness to support an extension of the franchise in Ire-
land, contended that the state of that country at this
moment afforded sufficient reason for not opening up the
question of Parliamentary Reform.
The OTONOGRUE attributed the delay of the Govern-
ment in bringing in a bill to the influence exercised over
them by the Tory members from Ireland, and the discon-
tent which prevailed there to the conviction in the Irish
mind that it was useless toexpect justice from the Imperial
Parliament.

Mr. PEEL-DAWSON opposed, and Mr. COGAN spoke in
support of the motion.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER denied that
the elections for Waterford and Tipperary last autumn, or
the influence of the Conservative members from Ireland,
had induced the Government to delay the Reform Bill for
that country. The Government would have been glad to
have put Ireland and Scotland upon a footing of perfect
equality, but, although the Cabinet was unanimous in its
desire to do so, there were circumstances of difficulty and
complexity in the condition of Ireland which precluded
the idea of legislation in the direction of popular represen-
tation. Ho promised, however, that if the Government
was in office next year one of its first and most agreeable,
duties would be to bring in an Irish Reform Bill.
Mr. GLADSTONE, while declaring that in his opinion
the Government was to blame for nut laying the Irish Bill
upon the table, expressed a hope that, after the promise
given by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the motion
would not be pressed to a division.
After a few words from Sir F. HETGATE, the motion was
withdrawn.

Captain VIVIAN called attention to a circular lately
issued from the War Department defining the duties of
volunteers in cases of riot; and moved ¶' That the volun-
teer force was established solely for the purpose of security
against foreign invasion, and that the members of that
force, in cases of domestic tumult or disturbance, have no
obligations or duties distinct from those of other citizens,
and are in such cases no more than any other citizen
liable to orders or instructions from the military or civil
authorities."

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL explained that the cir-
cular in question merely amounted to this, that volunteers
were not exempt from the obligation which attached to
all her Majesty's subjects to quell civil disturbances if
called upon to do so, but that under no cir;umstances
should they bo required to act in their military character.
Mr. W. E. FORSTER thought. the whole question de-

pended upon what the volunteers were to du with their
arms. He hoped the circular would be withdrawn, and
that some clear and preeso instructions would be sub?ti -
tuted for it which volunteer officers could understind.
After soma observations from Col. NORTH,
Sir J. PAKINGTON said the circular of the War-office
clearly defined what were the duties of volunteers, and the
Government would have been to blame if they bad failed
to issue an instruction as to the duties devolving on volun-
teers and of all other citizens in extreme cases of riot or
insurrection.
Mr. T. HUGHES suggested that certain of the orders
should be withdrawn, in order that there might bo a return
to the state of the law as it previously existed.
Some remarks followed from Lord Eleho, Gen. Peel, the
Solicitor-General, and Sir G. Grey.
Mr. AYRTON suggested the omission from the motion
of the concluding words, that set fcrth that in case of
domestic tumtrlt or disturbance volunteers no more than
any other citizens are liable to orders from the military or
civil authorities.
Sir J. PAKINGTON having promised to take the subject
into consideration, with a view to modify the instructions,
Mr. VIVIAN accepted the suggestion of Mr. Ayrton, and the
motion, as amended, was agreed to.
The Local Government Supplemental Bill was read a
second time.
The other business was disposed of, and the house ad-
journed at five minutes to two.