The Sun.
London, England, 1867-07-09 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT

HOUSE OF LORDS—TiIIs EVENING.
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack a
five o'clock.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.
The Carnarvon and Llamberis Railway Bill was read a
third time.
The Patriotic Fund Bill was read a slcond time.
On the motion of tho Earl of DEVON, the Galway
Harbour (Composition of Debt) Bill was committed.
THE FATE OF MAXIMILIAN.

In answer to a question from Lord ti TRATFORD DE
RaDCLIFFE,
The Earl of DERBY stated that they had received
positive information that the unfortunate Maximilian
had been shot on the 19th of Juno last.
He was one amongst the first to deprecate so unnecessary,
so barbarous, a murder as this.
After a few remarks concerning the captives in Abyssinia
the subject dropped.
The Blackwater Bri3ge Bill was also committed.
The Public Records (Ireland) 8111 was passed.
The rrport of the amendments on the War Department
Stores Protection Bill was received.
The Charitable Donations and Bequests Bill was read a
third time.
The Reel Estate Charges Act Amendment Bill was read
a second time.
On the motion of Lord STANLEY of ALDERNEY
the Railways (Guards and Passengers Communication)
Bill was read a second time.
(LEFT SITTING.)

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—THrs DAY.
Tho SPEAKER took the chair at two o'clock, when, the
house having resolved itself into committee, the further
consideration of the bill for the amendment of the Repre-
sentation of the People was proceeded with.
Mr. LOCKE moved the following clause :—" (Notice
of rate in arrear to be given to voters.) Where any poor
rate due from any occupier in respect of any premises
withi a borough on the fifth day of January in
followi any year
shall remain unpaid on the first day of June ng., the
overseers whose duty it may bo to collect such rate shall,
on or before the 20th of such month of June, give a notice
thereof in the form set forth in Schedule (X) to this act to
every such occupier as would on payment of such rate bo
entitled to vote in the election of a member or members of
Parliament for the borough in respect of his occupation of
the said premises ; the notice shall be doomed to be duly
given if delivered to the occupier or left at his last
or usual place of abode, or with some person
on the promises of which the rate is payable,
or the notice may bo sent by the post, free
of postage, or the sum chargeable as postage for the
same being first paid, directed to the occupier at
his place of abode as described in the rate book; any over-
seer who shall wilfully withhold such notice with intent
to keep such occupier off the list or register of voters for
the said borough shallbe deemed guilty of a breach of duty
under the Registration Act."
The clause was read a second time, and a. variety of
amendments were moved by Mr Hardy. A discussion
followed, during which Mr. Gladstone thought the most
convenient course was to adopt the amendments with the
understanding that they would be open fur discussion on
the bringing up of the report.
Mr. SCHREIBER said ho had an amendment to move,
that for a second member for Cheltenham ; but, after the
declaration which had been maeo on a previous occasion,
that there were no means in th© possession of Government
of complying with the request, he should withdraw the
motion.
Mr. W. COWPER moved that the borough of Hertford
should comprise the towns of Ware and Hoddesden.
Mr. DIMSDALE spoke strongly in favour of the pro-
position, and said such an arrangement would be agree-
able to all parties.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
the discussion of this question showed clearly that
members were not aware of the power of the Boundary
Commissioners. They had power to deal with such mat-
tors, and, if necessary, to enlarge the borough of Hertford ;
they would recommend, and Parliament would take care
that that recommendation was carried into effect.
The clause was withdrawn.
Captain HAYTER withdrew a similar clause that he
had on the paper, to add Shipton Mallen and Glastonbury
to the borough of Wells.
Mr. HARVEY LEWIS said, after the declaration of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, ho should withdraw his
motion for the giving two additional members for 31aryle-
bone.
That the
rE.
countyD E RlNoGf
KtehnetnhomedvievdidetldieinfotollotTirineeg
diavuissieon:-13,
each division returning two men
schedules
laThe
CporolotßositsiofnjEwagsavneeg.naotitybioeeedsbitNleihooautstilidowumht
oottnv dot
that
lei sa to i
in
owes_
were taken into consideration
;manr.
(M Dodson)
to fTt
The
ee inserted
announcementinstead ration
the
hoohhani
thene
committeefurtrert cl
el
tahbueislieLs p
rtloo,o
eh
emoveded t
oe lai.ci.ted'
at thatloud
thornehee
r,waeorde
e four original
con-
sideration of the schedules of I
R moved that
only in future
schedules having
The eLcon
returnc
hkeoEn
Kt oof hEeQbbuier l
the following boroughs , one mem
parthments:—lfoniton, Thetford Wells, Evesham, Marl-
borough, Harwich Richmond, Lymington, Chippenham,
Bridport, Stamford, Chipping Wycombe, Poole, Andover,
Leominster, Tewkesbury, Ludlow, Ripon, Huntingdon,
Malden, Buckingham, Newport, (Isle of Wight.), New
mown, Tavistock, Lewes, Bodmin, Great Marlow, evizes,
Hertford, Dorchester, Lichfield, Cockermouth, Bridg-
north, Guildford, Chichester, Windsor, Knaresborough,
and Andover.
The now schedule having been read a second time, and
ordered to stand part of tho bill,
Schedule B, which enumerated the followiug new
boroughs to return one member each, viz., Darlington,
Hartlepool, Stockton, Gravesend, Barnley, Staleybridge,
Wednosbury, Middlesborough, and Dewsbury, was
agreed to on the understanding that Mr. Ayrton's motion
to strike out Darlington for the purpose of inserting "Sur-
rey, Wandsworth, Tooting, Streatham, St. Mary, Batter-
sea, Putney, and so much of the parish of Lambeth as was
not included in the borough of Lambeth," should be
taken on the bringing up of the report, as it was desirable
that the bill should pass through committee that evening.
(Hear, hear.)
The remaining schedules having been agreed to, the
bill passed through committee.
The announcement was received with loud cheers from
both sides of the house.

HOUSE OF COMMONS_IJAST EVENING.
REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE BILL.
Mr. EDWARD JAMES moved an amendment to the
clause with the object of making the question of distance
of residence quite an open matter.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said lie
thought the ohm& ought to be made exceptional iu far-our

of the City of London, and that the limit proposed by the
mover of the clause ought to be adhered to.
Mr. PIM thought a groat injustice would bo done if
that determination was agreed to. Take the case of three
partners of a firm in the City of London. One of the part-
ners lived at St. John's-wood, another at Windsor, and
the other at Brighton the clause would give the
vote to the first two, but why, he should like
to know, was the latter to be deprived of his vote? Ile
fulfilled all his duties as a citizen just as much as the
other two.

The amendment moved by Mr. JAMES was negatived
without a division. .
On the motion that the clause be added to the bill, a
discussion ensued with regard to the exceptional circuity:
stances that had prevailed in favour of the City of Loudon.
On the motion of Mr. RUSSELL GURNEY, a new

clauso was ordered' to form part of the bill, d!squalifyiug
parsons reported guilty of bribery at Totnes from voting
for the county of Devon ; a similar clause relating to Great
Yarmouth and the counties of Norfolk and Suffolk; a
smilar clause with regard to Lancaster and the county of
Lancaster; and a si,nilar clause respecting.. Reigate and
the county of Surrey.

Lord E. CECIL moved a clause di•q'ialifying persons
from voting who had been convicted of felony, larceny,
perjury, or subornation of perjury.
The committee allowed it to be read a second time,
though the Chancellor of the Exchequer hinted his dislike
for it; but, oa the question that it be added to the bill, the
opposition assumed a more decided tone, and Mr. Glad-
stone observed that the committee were perpetrating a
grave error in introducing a new principle of criminal law
into the Reform Bill, a sentiment which was received with
an approving cheer. They were actually going to con-
stitute a semi-criminal class. Hitherto they told the man
who had committed any of the offentes enumerated in the
clause, "You shall go into court, be tried, and have a sen-
tence inflicted upon you, and that sentence shall mark the
measure of the punishment which society inflicts upon
you." After that sentence had been served out the prin-
ciple of our law was that the man should be restored to
freedom and to life. To innocence, of course, he could not
be restored ; but he protested against the man having
heaped upon him the stigma of his former offences.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL having expressed his
concurrence in this view of the question the clause was
eventually withdrawn, its mover intimating that he should
re-open the subject on the report.

y
aclal
carry
yabortive
ea tgt
vtni
np
gt s
awere second mademe
mbb
rMtro.
H.FBaeilliamnodntecitoli
aDoHnpi udieidnl3vdi
inyergrn.
:63110afeolacndlnka;y:isaMr.
inn
e cgl
clause
uzrtsupetß. public-house
grouting
Siecaam-thsii tneoh, a
second
: doemal
Cliftonau eamseb o
polling-day
restricting h ;
Mr.
Brrist°toSOlvaannseeaw;
borough, with one member.
Mr. GLADSTONE, in moving a clause to the effect that
South Lancashire should be separated into two division;
each to represent three members (instead of two each, as
proposed by the bill), once more condemned the scheme of
redistribution, and male it a special complaint that out of
the 25 additional seats given to tho counties only ono was
allotted to South Lancashire. This he pronounced an in-
justice, and, arguing that the disfranchisement of the
small boroughs ought to be carried further, declared that
their doom was sealed, and could not be averted.
The clause was supported by Mr. A. Egerton, the Mar-
quis of Hartington, and Mr. Newdegato, and opposed by
the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who dilated upon the
liberal character of the measure as a whole, and rigidly de-
clined to push the disfranchisement of the smaller bo-
roughs further. He also reminded the committee that of
late years Lancashire had had its representation greatly in •
creased, and that this was much extended under the bill.
Stating the case plainly, the right hon. gentleman pointed
out that that county would have 82 members, who might
betaken as representing 66,000 persons each, whilst Mid-
dlesex would be represented by only 18 members, with up-
wards of 122,000 of population to each.
Ultimately the clause was permitted by its mover to be
negatived without a division.
Colonel GILPIN proposed a clause taking away ono
member from each of the four Parliamentary boroughs
next above 10,000 inhabitants, according to the last decen-
nial census, namely, Tiverton, Tamworth, Warwick, and
Barnstaple, and transferring the seats to Luton, Keighly,
Barnsley, and St. Helen's.
The clause was met with a vigorous resistance on the
part of the members for the threatened borough; Mr. Den-
man and Mr. Walrond (Tiverton), Mr. John Peel and Sir
R. Peel (Tamworth), Sir G. Stucley (Barnstaple), Mr.
Repton and Mr. A. Peel (Warwick). The debate was
conducted with much animation for a considerable time,
and a passage between Sir R. Peel and Colonel Stuart in
reference to the claims of Luton to enfranchisement, the
character of its population, and the causes of its growth
catteed intense merriment.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER opposed the
clause. Reminding the committee that they had arrived
at these several conclusions—that no borough with a popu-
lation less than 10,000 should be ropresonted by more than
ono member; that no borough with a population not ex-
ceeding 5,000, and returning ono member, should be dis-
franchised; that curtain large towns should be repre-
sented; and that four boroughs should have their repre-
sentation increased, he pressed upon the attention of the
committee the inconvonionse and disturbance which must
arise from their now, at the end of the session, when they
had advanced so far in their labours, departing from the
principle of the arrangomact, and opening up now ques-
tions of controversy.
Mr. GLADSTONE again commented upon the imper-
fect character of the redistribution scheme, and said he
would give his support to any proposal that was calculated
to improve it by giving promise of durability. Conse-
quently ho should vote for the clause proposed by Colonel
Gilpin.
The committee having divided, the clause was negatived
by 224 to 195.
Progress was then reported.
The remainder of the orders, forty-three in number,
were then dispatched, and the house rose at half-past two
o'clock.