The Sun.
London, England, 1867-07-30 00:00:00

THE ROYAL PARKS BILL.

A conference of Liberal members of Parliament
on the subject of the above bill was held last even-
ing iu the tea -room of the House of Commons. Mr.
J. S. Mill occupied the chair. The following M.P.'s
were present :—Mr. Bright, Professor Fawcett,
Viscount Amberley, Mr. Torrens, Mr. Hughes, Mr.
Locke, Mr. Lewis, Mr. Ayrton, Mr. P. A. Taylor,
Mr. Clay, Mr. Maguire, Sir John Gray, Mr. Holden,
Mr. WhiteritA7C6wilishr
Whal-
ley, Mr. Hadfield, Mr. Stansfeld, Mr. Cowen, Mr.
Shaw Lefevre, and Mr. Young. Mr. Beales and
several of the council of the Reform League
attended.

The CHAIRMAN having explained that the object
of the conference was to obtain the views of those
within and outside the House of Commons who
took an active part in opposing the bill,
Mr. BEALES asked permission to make a few ob-
servations. He thought they must all agree in the
propriety of Mr. Locke's motion, but supposing it
was defeated he wished to know what course would
be pursued by the opponents of the bill. The Re-
form League did not want to have any demonstra-
tion unless they were driven to it. They wished it
to be understood that Primrose-hill or Victoria-park
would not satisfy the working classes as places for
open air meetings, and that no place was so central
as Hyde-park. He challenged any person to dis-
prove their right to meet there.

Mr. TAYLOR was of opinion that, considering the

lateness of the session and other circumstances, they
' were justified in straining all the forms of the
house to procure the defeat of the bill. He consi-
dered Mr. Locke's amendment satisfactory, and
thought there could be no difference of opinion as
to its being entitled to support.
The CHAIRMAN said there was no doubt they
ought to give Mr. Locke's amendment their support,
but snpposing it failed, the material question arose,
What steps should be taken to frustrate the further
progress of the bill. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. BEALES asked the members present to avail
themselves of every form of the house, in the event
of the failure of the amendment referred to, to frus-
trate the bill and save the necessity of proceeding
out of the house. If the measure was proceeded
with in its present form the League would have re-
course to the strongest proceedings.

Professor "FAWCETT said if Mr. Locke's motion
was carried their work was done, but if not, union
was necessary. He thought it was absolutely neces-
sary that they should have a certain number of
members remain in the house till the last hour every
night to watch the action of the Government in re-
ference to the bill. He should be very happy to at-
tend in that way until the end of the session.
Mr. TORRENS considered it undesirable to decide
prematurely upon a course of action. They were
holding a confereno* with ()nen doors, and hp
tainly thought they were not observing good tactics
in letting their opponents know what they would do.
If they succeeded, and he had every reason to hope
they would from what he heard before entering the
room, iu carrying Mr. Locke's amendment, their
labours were at an end ; but if they were disap-
pointed, he thought it would be then time enough
to consider what they should do next. It appeared
to him they should have a discussion suggesting the
plain practical consideration what were the alterna-
tives to be proposed to the Government shutting the
parks. They all knew that Lord Shaftesbury pro-
posed last year that before the Government limited
the use of the park to popular purposes, it should
take upon itself to provide places suitable to the fair
and constitutional exigencies of the metropolis. He
agreed with Mr. Beales as to the farce of driving the
people to Victoria-park or Primrose-hill; and there-
fore his motion would be that the Government, be-
fore they further proceeded with the bill, be asked
to show their capability of providing suitable places
in the metropolis for open-air meetings. The
practical question was above all to urge upon the
Government the fact that their bill was defective
in its construction, because it suggested nothing
as an alternative to what they took away.
He believed that on that ground alone,
without going into broader questions, they would
have a large number of members voting for Mr.
Locke's amendment.

Mr. WHALLEY thought their principal duty was
to protest against the taking away of one of their
undoubted rights.

Mr. CANDLISH thought they all agreed in their
determination to support Mr. Locke's motion.
(Hear, hear.) He considered that any action before
the disposal of that motion would be premature.
Mr. MERRIMAN (Reform League) said the ques-
tion was one which . the people of the metropolis
wished to have settled in a satisfactory manner. The
bill was looked upon by the people as an attempt on
the part of the Government to take revenge upon
them for having extorted the Reform Bill through
the medium of Hyde-park. He was certain that
unless Mr. Locke's motion was carried there would
be considerable trouble on the part of the authorities.

The CiriimsiAN said it seemed to be the intention
of the Reform League to adopt measures antago-
nistic to the bill by meetings and otherwise outside
the house, and there was evidently and equally a
strong desire on the part of the members present to
do their best in opposing the bill. (Hear, hear.) He
believed no member of the League could exceed
many members of Parliament in their hostility to
the bill, and in their determination to frustrate it.
(Cheers.)
After some remarks from one or two members of
the Reform League, the proceedings terminated.