The Sun.
London, England, 1867-04-13 00:00:00

AFFAIRS OF SPAIN.

mit tee.

Colonel SYKES asked the Secretary of State for
Foreign Affairs whether, in the case of a rupture with
Spain, sufficient previous notice would be given to British
shipping to enable them to leave Spanish ports.
Lord STANLEY said he hope I that the contingency
he alluded to would not arise. If unfortunately it should
arise the Government would give the earliest information

on the subject.
THE EASTER RECESS—THE ADJOURNED

DEBATE.

The CIIANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, in moving
that the house at its rising adjourn until the 29th inst.,
said with respect to the termination of the adjourned de-
bate, all he could say was that the question on which the
debate arose did not arise from his side of the house. It
was, however, the wish of her Majesiy's Government.that
the division should take place that evening.
Mr. OSBORNE said he wished to interpose a question
to the right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer. HO had seen a document of a very extraordinary
nature, which two members of that house, the lion. mem-
ber for Swansea (Mr. Dillwyn) and the hon. and gallant
member for Dublin county. The document was to the
effect tha certain, pro poaitions land been made by some main-
bars of his side of the house to Col. Taylor. (Hear.) The
document stated that Colonel Taylor had accepted the
amendment of Mr. Hibbert, and that Mr. Disraeli and
Lord Derby had also agreed to it. What he wanted to
know was whether the matter had been submitted to the
Cabinet. • . _

Mr. DILL WYN said it was quite true that he had had
a conversation with the hon. member for Dublin county.
It was with respect to the adjournment, and he had
thought some compromise might yet be effected. He
thought Chat without something of the kind was done the
labour of passing the Reform Bill would be almost insur-
mountable. He had jotted down certain matter very
hurrienly in the lobby and shown it to Cohnel Taylor,
and he had not thought he was precluded from showing
it to his friends.

Colonel EDWARDS thought it was a most unfair
attack upon Colonel Taylor, and he should like to know
whether the hon. member for Notts had had the common
courtesy to give that hon. and gallant gentleman notice of
his intention to ask the question.

Mr. OSBORNE said he had had the common courtesy
to inform Colonel Taylor that he intended to bring the
matter forward.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
motion to which reference had been made was quite un-
known to him. With respect to his having consulted
with the Earl of Derby on the subject it was absurdly
erroneous. (Cheers.) The noble earl, he was happy to
say, was improving in health, yet he (the Chancellor of
the Exchequer) had not thought it right to
trouble him with any public business at pre-
sent. He very much regretted his gallant friend,
Col. Taylor, who had met with an accident that day, was
not in his place, because, doubtless, he would be able to
satisfy the house as to the part he had taken in the matter.
He could not say how deep would be his regret if any
word uttered is a private and friendly conversation was
to be made the subject of a solemn point of inquiry. He
thought the whole matter was nothing more than a mare's
nest. (Hear, hear, and loud laughter.)'
Sir G. GREY said if the docuMent was shown to mem-
bers with the view of influencing their votes, it was a
matter that demanded the serious attention of the house.
Lord ELCHO said he shbuld like to know why the hon.
member for Anglesey, who had been one of those who had
seen the document, had not brought forward the matter
instead of the hon. member for Marlborough.
Mr. 0. STANLEY said he was asked whether, in the
event of its becoming necessary, he would rise in his place
in Parliament, and say that he had seen the document.
He said he would. (Hear, hear.) lie was not shown the
paper as. a private document, and he considered it was
used for the Furmse of influNicing votes. (Hear, hear,
and ironical cheers.)
Lord STANLEY said her Majesty's Government en-
tered into the debate on the Representation of the People's
Bill free and unpledged. (Hear, hear, and loud cheers).
There was no understanding direct or implied with any
member as to concessions. (Loud cheers.) The Govern-
ment remained, perfectly steadfast to the main purposes of
the bill, awl ho begged to assure the house would do
so to the last. (Loud cheers.)
Mr. GLADSTONE said the speech of the noble lord was

quite worthy of him. (Cheers.) It was an open and can-
did expression of opinion that did him honour, and ad-
mitted of no mistake. (Hear, hear.) He hoped hon.
gentlemen on his (the Opposition side) of the house would
fall in with the general wish, that the vote on the question
of prompt payment of rates should be taken that evening.
(Hear, hear.)
The subject then dropped, and the motion for the
adjournment of the house to the 29th was agreed to.
REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE'S BILL.
The house then went into committee 011 this bill.
Mr. ROEBUCK, on resuming the adjourned debate on
clause 3, supported the clause as it stood in the bill. His
object in doing so was to get for the people of England a
Reform Bill during the present session, which he was
certain was not the object of those who
brought forward the amendment to the clause. Ile
did not krow the bitterness of loss of office, because ho
had never been in that position, but it seemed to him
to be the desire of those out of office to regain it by
jumping over the heads of those who at present enjoyed the
enviable distinction. To show that he was sincere in his
desire for the passing of the bill, he should vote for the
clause of the right hotitgentlemanthe Chancellor of the
Exchequer.
Mr. BERESFORD-HOPE looked upon the bill as
dangerous and democratic in principle, and predicted that
the moment it received the royal assent it would crush
out the middle class and Americanise our institution Er.
Mr. W. E. FORSTER admitted that, being a Radical
reformer, and having been in favour of household suffrage
at a time when it had few friends, be would have been
compelled to separate himself from his former colleagues
and to vot3 for the bill of the Government if it was in
reality based upon household suffrage ; on the contrary, it
would set up a rating suffrage.
141 r. LOOSE defended the meeting in the tea-room (now

called the " Tea Party"), and urged that if it had not been
for the action taken by the 52 gentlemen who attended on

that occasion the bill might never have got into com-

Mr. HUBBARD expressed the regret he felt at being
compelled to vote against the Government, because he
considered their bill meant household suffrage, and to that
he had an invincible objection. _ _

Mr. HORSMAN (who spoke from the front bench of
the Opposition) owned that he was in favour of fixing the
line at a£s rental, ant that in his opinion fire-sixths of
the house (including the vast majority of the Opposition)
would be better pleased with it than with the plan of the
Government.

Mr. HARDY, in an able speech, defended the measure

of the Government, contending that it would admit every

man to the franchise who cared to possess it, and who
proved himself to be worthy of it by bearing the burdens

of citizenship.

Mr. BRIGHT—Mr. Dodson, I shall not keep the house
to a very late hoer, but I should like to make a few obser-
vations before the debate concludes. The right lion. gen-
tleman made himself merry with the fact that last night
the noble lord the member for Stamford and I rose toge-

- .
thor, and that I was willing to give way to him, ani he was
willing to give way to me, because wo were engaged in the

same cause. If the noble lord has made any advance to my
opinions—and I suspect since last year he has honestly and
honourably made some—l'can only say that I should wel-
come him not to this cause only, but to any good cause, as

one of the most powerful of advocates that it could pos7

sibly receive. The noble lord and I have never exchanged
a word in private ; but I take this opportunity t f saying
that I listened when he was in office to a speech on a sub-
ject very foreign to this night's debate—on a subject con-
nected with his own office, the annexation of the territory
of Mysore— And I say I have never heard a speech in this
house which contained nobler sentiments, delivered in

better language, and in a manner more calculated to im-

press the house. I regretted the noble lord felt it his duty
to leave the Treasury bench. But if I may be satisfied that
the noble lord has approached me by a very little, I may be
as much gratified, not by the small steps, but the large pro-
gress, that the right hon. gentleman has made since last
year. If it were worth while to refer to the pages of Han-
sard, it would be possible to show that there was scarcely

a member of this house who on that occasion felt, or pre-

tended to feel, a greater terror at the admission of the .£7
householder than was felt by the eight hon. gentleman
himself. But I will not reproach him or his colleague, the
Chancellor of the Exchequer. I am only too happy to
find they are willing to proceed even to the length of tho
measure which they have introduced, and I shall not

break my heart if the measure, as it comes out of this
house, should not. take precisely the shape I should like ;

but I shall4,console myself that the past barriers

against a just representation are broken down, and
the Chancellor of the Exchequer and his colleagues
havo utterly repudiated the whole of tho past with which
they-have been connected. (Cheers.) Now I shall ask the
attentio'n of the house to the precise point before us, be-
cause I am not about to discuss this question as a matter

of party. (Oh, oh, and cheers.) The Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer made a bargain with us at tho beginning of the
session, that it was not to ba a party question for the over-
throw of Ministers. I shall treat it in that sense. Last
night I was surprised at the speech of the right hon. gen-
tleman the member for Oxfordshire (Mr. Henley), because
it was only three or four weeks ago when the right hon.
gentleman threw out a hint to the house that it would be
desirable possibly to alter the law of rating, and draw a
low line excluding some and admitting great numbers.
IThe right hon. gentleman (the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer) seized upon that hint, and gnus a certain cordial ap-
I proval of it; and 1 am not sure that my right hon. friend
(Mr. Gladstone) has not been in some degree induced to
take the step he has taken in eonsequenee of the powerful
support of the right hon. gentleman opposite. (Cheers and
oh.) Now, sir, what is the amendment before the house ?
1 It is simply this : It affects the borough franchise only, and
1 it proposes a very reasonalide proposition —that every I,er-
son to whom you offer that borough franchise should be
placed on exactly the same term; with the same facilities
for obtaining it, and with the same powers of enjoying it,
that every other person shall have. It means that the
present householder from £lO and upwards, and the house-
i holder from £lO and as low down as the house may go,
shall be 'exactly on the same footing, and that the com-
I pound householder above £lO shall have po advantage
over the compound householder below £lO. ' It mean; in
fact, that you shall not select from amongst your consti-
tuencies special classes for special privileges; but that,
having determined who are the persons on whom you will
confer the franchise, you will deal honestly, fairly, gene-
rously, and equally with them all. (Cheers.) But at this
1 moment that is the state of the law, with scarcely any ex-
ception. The Reform Act deals in a certain way with the
£lO occupier. There has been a difficulty with regard to
the compound householder ; but that difference dues not
exist by law, but it existsiby the practice of the overseers of
the poor. I was told to-day by a gentleman who was
very profoundly versed in these matters that it was the law
at present that all occupiers' names should be upon the
rate book. If that be so, of course the instructions which
I believe some time ago went out from the Poor-law board,
that the rate book should be so formed, will be in accord-
ance with the law, and henceforth all occupiers will find
their names upon the rate book, whether they are payers
of rates directly or of a composition rate. Well, what will
happen ? I believe that the Reform Act intended that all
those persons' names should bo upon the rate book and
upon the register, and that it was not Parliament which
has kept them off, but lawyers' law and the decisions of
revising barristers, and for a time the decisions of the
courts. But note, the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Hardy)
in his able speech never attempted to point out any real
ground why the compound householder below £lO should
be treated differently from his brother above £lO. I wish
that to be explained to the house. I see no reason shown
for any such exclusion, and I venture to say, in opposition
to what ho has said, that that exclusion and that differ-
ence must be held to be a direct violation of the principle
of the law as it now stands. Does he deny that at the
present moment the landlord's payment is, for the purpose
of the franchise, the tenant's payment ? If there were any
doubt on this matter, it may be set at rest by my reading to
the house an extract from a letter in which is quoted
the opinion of two very eminent judges on the matter,
judges who are especially eminent on all questions con-
nected with appeals on the registration law. The writer
of this letter is himself a registration agent in the north
of England. The hon. gentleman here quoted the rulings
of Mr. Justice Tindall and Mr. Justice Maule in the Court
of Common Pleas, most emphatically laying down the
doctrine that for the purposes of the franchise the landlord's
payment of rates was the tenant's payment. The hon.
gentleman went on to say : Well, I think that quotation
from three eminent judges clearly settles what is the law
now with regard to the matter, and I wish now to ask the
Chancellor of the Exchequer why he proposes to change
it ? Has the law been found to be a bad law ? It was
passed through both Houses of Parliament without any
division, and it has remained uncomplained of and uncon-
tested in both Houses of Parliament for the last sixteen
1 years. I wish to know then why, merely for the purpose
of a large disfranchisement and exclusion, the present ab-
solutely satisfactory condition of the law is to be objected
to and interfered with. Now, the right hon. gentleman
(Mr. Hardy) tells us this measure will allow people to
come in. I shall tell him how it keeps them out. He
blames the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Gladstone) for a bill
with a line which makes no moral selection whatever.
What will the bill of the right hon. gentleman do? It will
give a vote to a man who lives in a hovel worth not more
than £3 a year, if that man by any moans pays his own
rates in his own name—(hear, hear)—and it will exclude
every man whose rental may be £8 or £9 value if he pays
his rates through his landlord. (Hear.) Well, I think
there is a capriciousness in that which will be found most
unsatisfactory. (Hear, hear.) But let us leave for a
moment . th© capriciousness with regard to individuals,
and sea ' how it affects towns. The honourable
and learned member for Sheffield (Mr. Roebuck)
made a speech the other night on this bill. Taking the
gross numbers, he will find that iu the town of Sheffield
this bill would immediately give the chance of g etthineago—
on
the register no less than 28,334 persons—(hear,
which I believe is 11 or 12 per cent, of the whole number
—that is, immediately under this bill in the first year of its
operation, that is the number it would give a chance of
being on the register. But what does it do now for the—
in this respect—unfortunate town which I am permitted,
in conjunction with my colleague, to represent in this
house ? Birmingham is a town, as the house knows, con-
siderably larger than Sheffield. It is concerned chiefly in
the same manufacture as Sheffield. I would say no more
for Birmingham now than I have said for it before I repre-
sented it ; but I say there is not in this kingdom a town
whose population is more industrious and, as connected
with their industry, more intelligent than the population of
Birmingham. (Cheers.) What does the bill do for the
town of Birmingham? It gives a chance of admission to
2,334 persons—(hear, hear)—and it excludes, under the
Small Tenements Act—(no, no)—wait till I have finished
my sentence—(hear)—it excludes, under the Small Tene-
ments Act, and under the various local rating acts, no
fewer than 36,177. (No, no, hear, hear.) "No." I know
very well what hon. gentlemen mean. They mean, of
course, that to accom:uodete the capricious measure of the
Government—(hear, hear, oh, oh) - and the caprice of that
measure is in no degree essential to a sound measure of re-
fortu—(hear, hear)—that in Birmingham they are to got rid
of the Small Tenements Act, if they can make up their
mind to that, and they are to come here in order to get
Parliament to consent to a bill to repeal their local
rating act. (Cheers.) I am not surprised that
the member for Sheffield or the member for Old-
ham should think that, as regards that particular spot with
which they are principally connected, there is something
useful in this bill. (Hear, hear.) But I have a higher
opinion of the people of Sheffield—(hear, hear)—and of
the people of Oldham—(hear, hear)—than to believe that,
for the sake of a special advantage to them in this respect,
they would prefer that a bill should be passed which would
do such grievous injustice to Birmingham, and the great
majority of the boroughs of the kingdom. (Hear, hear.)
Not longer ago than last night, when this matter was under
discussion, I had an opportunity of speaking to three gen-
tlemen from Birmingham, who were u., here on a matter

not at all connected with this debate ; and one of them was
an eminent officer of the Chamber of Commerce, and

another equally eminent in connection with the adminis-
tration of poor law affairs. I asked them—for I didn't
want to suggest to them any difficulties—" Would it not
be possible for you in Birmingham so to alter your position
with regard to the question of compounding for rates that

you could put yourselves very soon in as satisfactory a
position as is the town of Sheffield ?" They said they be-
lieved it to be absolutely impossible. In that town the
great majority of these 36,000 have never paid this poor
rate at :all directly. It has not been the custom of the
town. And to ask them, for the sake of putting some of
them upon the register, in accordance with the require-
ments of this capricious bill, to destroy the whole fabric
of the economic system connected with their poor rates,
is to ask what the house has no right to ask
--(cheers) —and we have no reason to expect it

will be complied with if we ask it. I think the
house, and the a►embers for all the boroughs thus ad-
versely affected, have a right to complain that a bill has
been introduced having this essential quality, that it
must cause confusion in every borough when it has not
been shown, and never can be shown, that the cause of
that confusion is in the smallest do; ee necessary to the

satisfactory settlement of tho question of reform. (Cheers.)
Now, the house in many cases proceeds very much upon
precedent. It likes what is old, and when things aro 30
years old they have got a sort of respectability about them.
I have a great regard for the Reform Act, and the Chan-

celior of the Exchequer sometimes speaks of it as if he had

a great respect for it. lam not sure that he is not ac-
tuated in his present course in this session by a sort of envy
of Lord Russell. As Lord Russell is the great historic
authority on the Reform Act of 1832, he (the Chancellor of
the Exchequer) hopes to become the great historic name con-
nected with the Reform Act of 1867. (Hear, hear.) But
the principle of the Reform Act is extremely simple—
household suffrage, building occupation in towns, limited
by the value of LEO. That defines exactly what is in-
tended to be done ; and nearly all the bills that have been
introduced since that time have been based upon almost

the same-principle. That of the right hon. gentleman the
member for South Lancashire last year was based upon

the principle of a £7 rental. Nothing could be more
simple ; and, as far as it went, it was felt in all parts of
the country to be entirely clear and honest. (Hear, hear.)
But while that bill did definitely, clearly state what it was
intended to do, and could by no possibility deceive any-
body, this bill, capriciously proposing greatly to extend
the franchise, does actually exclude multitudes of those
who, if you touch this question at all, have a right to ex-
pect that their demand should be conceded. (Cheers.)
Tho remedy that the right honourable gentleman the
member for Lancashire proposes is very much in accord-
ance with the bill of 1832, and also with the bill of last
year. He wants to establish a definite ground and a
definite line, and to include the multitude, or a con-
siderable portion of them, that your bill must necessarily
exclude. (Cheers.) Now suppose—l put this to the mem-
bers of the Government who are really anxious, as I am,
that this matter should be settled within the framework
of this bill—suppose that this point were settled which
now we are discussing—suppose that the personal rating
were abandoned, and that this great exclusion were said
to be unjust and were given up, and it was thought better
to offer something distinct and definite to the approbation
and acceptance of the people well, then we should have
to determine what the franchise should be. And it must
be one of two things. If the personal rating was given
up, it must be either household suffrage—(hear, hear)—
household suffrage pure and simple, or it must be some
line—it does not follow that it must be the line of the right
hon. gentleman the member for South Lancashire—but it
must be some line above which, at present, the franchise
should be given to everybody, and below which, at present
and may be, for aught I know, for another thirty years,
the franchise should not bo extended. The right hon.
gentleman the member for South Lancashire has proposed
in his clause a £5 rating franchise ; and the President of
tho Poor-law Board has made very merry, and expressed
astonishment at that part of the clause by which he pro-
poses really to say that, wherever the variations in the
rating are so great as to be manifestly defeating the object
of the house in the bill—that where the real annual value
is £6 or £6 55., in that case the suffrage should be given.
(Hear, hear.) The proposal of the right hon. gentleman
really comes to this—that it would have, as near as I can
judge, the same effect in extending the franchise as if the
house were to adopt the proposition of the bill of 1860, and
give to the country a£6 rental franchise. (Cheers.) Now, I
am not going to chaffer about this matter. I believe honestly
that, whether the line of rating was drawn at £4, with the
rental at £5, or the line of rating was drawn at £5 with
the rental at £6, either of these measures would be a better
measure for the country and far more satisfactory, and far
more a settlement of this question, than the bill as it is
now before the Home. (Cheers.) I believe it because it
would be honest and equal. This bill is not equal ; and if
it is not equal it cannot be called honest. And I believe
more, that the proposition of the right hon. gentleman the
member for Lancashire would include within the electoral
list more completely and fully all that the House proposes
to take in, which is the bast paid and most intelligent of
the working classes of the kingdom. (Rear.) Now, the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, when ho was making a speech
in favour of his bill on the second reading in 1859, made
use of an observation or two which I think he has now been
putting into practice. He said, "I am perfectly aware of
all the tricks of management by which you can deal with
the borough franchise." (Hear.) He said, " How you can
manage to be doing a very liberal act, and yet keep out of
the franchise the very class for which so many persons ex-
press so much sympathy." (Cheers.) And he added, " I
have all these plans in my pigeon-hole—(great cheers and
laughter) —and could have availed myself of them with per-
fect impunity." I dare say the noble lord the member for
Stamford (Lord Cranborne), if he were at liberty to explain
his explanation, might tell us how many of these curiosi-
ties from the pigeon-holes of the right hon. gentleman had
been laid before the Cabinet. But I suppose, after finger-
ing them all over, and weighing which would be the like-
liest to suit his purpose, the right hon. gentleman said that
this, after all, was the cleverest dodge. (Cheers.) And he
had a not altogether absurd vision that there were gentle-
men on this side of the House—enthusiasiic reformers—
who would be caught by a proposition of this kind. (Hear,
hear.) There are gentlemen here who think that through
this bill they will get household suffrage. I understand
that the member for Glasgow and some of his friends are of
that opinion ; and they think they may get it, not now, but
trstsawhbueenligaoctielthsii
neseitticrahiewer
riiir_sthtsaiobwd(st
whom it
irritating
irsdotan,
otli
iultownl,hgoetunjust,ohahle ndrodeau
enrwtdhi
when
oewl
hhbpe insultinganeutbtilshio eo
incessantacfilolrentsdo
senehooldf
sthoeffrabgoor.oug(haseairn,
ion of some of my friends on this
unpleasant,
agitation
oi)uuopow_ndripeedi
tole:
side of the house. (Hear, hear.) Well, these gentlemen.
have not been remarkable for their activity in the reform
agitation. (Hear, hear.) I know not whether the member
for Glasgow and some others would be intending to take
what in America is called the stump, and to fight this ques-
tion at great public meetings through the country. (Laugh-
ter.)
on this question requiring
If they are, all I hope is that they may find pro-
gressthan I have found it to demand from me during the last
hear.) That isligetrhetituexhtt
very much less labour
ten years. But now let me ask these hon. gentlemen a
question on household suffrage. lam for it—have al ways
since I have discussed this question of reform, been in
iehobnrenll ttietnfehheyft 'arri
efstosrehymobei
favour of that basis of borough franchise, but I am bound
to admit that I believe three-fourths of the members of
this houso are not in favour of household suffrage.
(Cheers.) I doubt extremely, if all the gentlemen on the
other side were to leave the house, and the proposition
were put only to members on this side, whether it would
be carrried. (Cheers.) If that be so, I lean to the
opinion that it is not wise or statesmanlike policy to take
a measure partly because it is had, and because that bad-
ness will be so unpleasant to the public that yeti hope
the public will rise against it, and in the very next
Parliament will batter at these doors, and ask this house
again to obstruct its business and course of legislation to
deal with the question you now leave unsettled. (Cheers.)
And let me tell these hon. gentlemen that when that tim
does come these restrictions can no longer be maintained.
when that time does come, the
deny or to question. And
(Hear.) That that day will come I shall take no pains to
right hon. member for South Lancashire asks it to take
grant household House of Commons will take the very step then which the
now. (Hear.) It will not
and simple ; it will say, as I have said before and with
reason—because don't suppose that I have no sense—
(laughter) —of what is good, and honest, and independent
house will say then, as
in a constituency. (Cheers.) The
as I repeat now, that is not for the advantage of the con-
stituencies, and not for the advantsge of the poorest and
most dependent people, but greatly to their disadvantage,
that they should be placed in the condition of constant
temptation by being added to the electors. (Cheers.)
Therefore, though I have over been, and still am, in favour
of household suffrage as the basis of your franchise, still
I believe it would be wise now—and lam afraid that our
population
will not have very much improved in the mean-
while as to make it unwise then—to draw a line a little
above the pure and simple household suffrage—(An hon.
member: No, no)—with the view of getting a better con-
stituency. Ido not know who the gentleman is who calls
out "No, no." I have discussed this question as much as
any man in England—(a laugh)—l have thought as much
about it; I have a larger interest in its being settled now,
and settled well, than any other man to whom I mu speak-
ing—(oh, oh)--unless you put iu the balance the interest
which the Chancellor of Exchequer has in being histori-
cally connected with this question ; and, sir, I might speak
of my historical connection with it. (Cheers and laugh-
ter.) Well, though the hon. gentleman calls "No, no,"
I believe that you might now settle the question by a
low line. I would recommend a line somewhat lower
than that of the right hon. gentleman. (Laughter
and cheers from the Ministerial benches.) In
my own bill of 1838 1 proposed that the line should be
drawn at the £3 rate or the £4 rental. In speaking on this
subject two or three weeks ago, I said I thought it was not
necessary, if the house could come to any almost unani-
mous or general conclusion, that we should make a fight
for the sake of a pound in this matter. But Ido believe
now that you may settle it on principle, removing all that

irritation on which hon. gentlemen near me are relying for
coming down to pure and simple household suffrage, and
you might give such a large and generous franchise to the
inhabitants of the towns that in the lifetime of the youngest
man in this house no further demand for the extension of
the suffrage in boroughs would be made. (Cheers.) I
know nothing at all, I have not an idea, of what is to be
the result of the division to-night. 1 wish we could have
no division—(hear, hear)—and that the Government could
put their bill into a shape that would meet the wishes of
the vast majority of the nation. (Hear, hear.) But what-
ever the division may lead to, I state this with the utmost
truth and conscientiousness, that I have not taken a step
in regard to this bill, or said one single word in connection
with it, but what was prompted by an honest and most
earnest wish—(cheers, and oh, oh)—that now at this mo-
ment —at this supreme hour of this question—it should be
grappled with with the wisdom of statesmanship, and
should be offered to the great body of the people with that
generosity which belongs, I hope, at bottom to all the
great statesmen of this country. (Loud cheers.)

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, then
rose, and was received with cheers from his party.
He said : Although, sir, we are in committee upon
this bill for the representation of the people, there
are two policies before the House to-night upon
the most important portion of the measure. (Hear,
hear.) Though we shall be formally called upon to amend
the principle of the bill which -I have had the honour to
introduce, we really are to consider, upon the borough
franchise, a contrary policy and a counter proposition.
(Cheers.) The right hon. gentleman the member for South
Lancashire proposes to draw a hard and fast line, below
which no person is to obtain the privilege or aim at the
franchise. On the other hand, we have proposed a measure
under which every inhabitant of a house, subject to condi-
tions which are in harmony with the habits and manners
of the country—which I think are approved of by the ra-
tional discrimination of the people —should obtain the fran-
chise; and at the same time, instead of drawing this hard
and fast line, we have said to all who aro not now in a
position to avail themselves of the privilege which is offered
by the proposed clauses, we will take care that you shall
have the opportunity, if you disireit, of acquiring the right
and enjoying the right. (Cheers.) Now, sir, there are two
schemes for the settlement of the borough franchise which
are before the consideration of the committee to-night; for
it would be worse than idle to limit our discussion to the
few and scanty words which formally will be put, by you,
Mr. Dodson, for the opinion of the committee. Now to the
proposition which we have made for the settlement of the
borough franchise upon a rating household franchise, to be
enjoyed by the occupier personally paying rates after a
due residence—to that scheme the right hon. gentleman
has offered two main objections. He tells us, in the first
place that the principle of rating is new-fangled and alien.
I thought the principle of rating was one which was con-
sonant with the manners and customsof this country. It is
recognised by the common law, it is recognised by the sta-
tute law of the past generation, and in the age in which we
live it has been made part and portion of one Of the most
famous laws connected with our political history—the Re-
form Act of 1832. And therefore, sir, I was somewhat asto-
nished that the law of rating or the principle of rating
should be described by the right hon. gentleman as alien
and new tangled. The second objection to the proposi-
tion of the ,Government was that it was of too ex-
treme a ch
ee--aracter. That objection was scarcely
consistent with many observations subsequently made
by him, with many inferences which he afterwards drew,
and with many conclusions which his friends approved
and cheered, all of which seemed to express that the mea-
sure was of a very revolutionary and dangerous character ;
but now, according to the right hon. gentleman, its prin-
cipal otjection is that it is too exclusive. Well, sir, if these
are the objections which are made to our scheme, there are
also objections which are offered to the scheme of the
right hon. gentleman, which is founded upon a hard limi-
tation; and a great objection to that scheme, I think, is,
that it offers no settlement of the question. (Hear.) In
1859 we had to consider the question of parliamentary re-
form, and the result of our consideration of the subject was
that it was impossible, with any prospect of satisfac-
tion, to disturb the £lO franchise established in 1832.
We could not rely upon any such stand-point as £3, £7,
or £6 ; and in that state of things it was absolutely
necessary to leave the matter untouched. I am speaking
of 1859—0 r to proceed to the point we are now offering
to the house ; we took the opportunity of ascertaining
the opinion of the country, and we were convinced that
any attempt which world considerably diminish the bo-
rough franchise would be rendered impossible on account
of the determined opposition of the borough constituen-
cies, and we felt the only course to pursue was to recom-
mend to farliament not todoal with the borough franchise ;
but we attempted to introduce a portion of the working
classes by other means. We were, however, met by a
great opposition, which Gwen years have accurately ful-
filled. The right hon. gentleman the member for Caine
was one of the most busy managers in organising a party
for reducing the franchise, and a resolution was passed
which destroyed our Geveinment, and did more' injury to
the Liberal cause than anyting bcfore. The right hon.
gentleman, who was not right hon. then. I Mr. Lows—l
beg pardon, I was right honourable] - (laughter) —the
right hon. gentlemen preferre I to a high office—[llr.
Lows-1 was Vice-President of the Board of Trade in the
former Government, and Vice-President of the Council of
Education in the next]--we
tdiouninaoat ifmnrputtheeanpyaritmhpertoepeekr
nc onntdhuactt theoccasion.
eie
nright
uhtetnh.e gother evening, when the Secre-
tary for India expressed views which were worthy of the
integrity of his character, the right hon. member for Caine
jumped up and imputed his change of opinion to prefer-
ment —(cheers)—aud therefore I am right in
d
gentleman, who is a ready critic, but
notemin apt to
in
that he ought to cast some
rhgtiogh bear
the o ffi
he,een
c. r
reminiscences over his own past career. (Cheers.)
It is said that the small rating Acts are the creations of
the civilisation of the age ; but nothing has been seal
about jobbing vestries, rapacious landlords, and iedi-
rise to those Acts. They were, how-
gent tenants giving
But I cannot believe, when
in this age. (Hear, hear.)
ever, not-passed in an age remarkable Afoortpwuebulilcdsbpeiritanl
I doubt whether the Small Tenements
passed
wee princriiplghetss,antdh;giving poruivgihletgetsowibtlei
f
scared
laying dawn
id frnee-otmo electoralsuch constitutional course by . the
shadows and phantoms of those rating Acts. (Cheers.)
reference
if wo ledgis.latethiine thebill ssilaritt which
tiev:ec°lnnincieincesmwill disapp'ear. Imf atnhye
lot
the
cannot nh
Government
oestyt butieprl2p
supposed
nsbee:
incon
vb
ee
whichthe havearrangements
sound, they will assert their
under
principles we propose
heeh
a o
much dwelt on. (Hear,
made and attempted there are inconvenient and injurious
would come in under the fixed scheme
by the multitude who
sway and overcome thebedaiifti..)culltifes
gentleman r Surely there would be many
of the right hon.
consequences, why should they not. be equally expressed
more thousands of compound or quasi-compound house-
holders than could be introduced by the arrangement we
Under our proposal you could have all the men
propose.
to obtain
interest in politics, and
ble that they should do so.
you wish to get ; and if there are men who do not take an
will not exert themselves
the right, it is not desire
who do not aspire to
(Cheers.) It is assumed thatetfhelifbeulle would bo men en-
gaged in the honebt pursuits
political rights or to improve their condition; but I do not
believe that to be a just description of the majority of our
ccuntrymen. If eve do not keep out individuals of a wan-
dering character, who may be wanting in the civic virtues
of method, regularity, and order, what is the harm of it ?
Your object is to obtain the worthy, and there is no harm
done in the unworthy not being able to enter. (Cheers.)
Then it is asked, What is the value of these securities ?
and it is said that there will be a great agitation against
them, and that they will be disposed of in a few years.
It is a mistake to call them checks and securities ; but I
will tell you why they will not be impugned, but kept in
vigorous exercise. It is the persons who by submitting
to these conditions will guard them as the conditions
through which the privileges ought to be obtained.
oe
ablteani naye detnh et righthe ela
itino
av ot thea,
tt hmeayywbi lel look-
(Cheers.) When they find that by personally paying
trehmaven
with
rates
ith they
extreme
ferred by persons who do not pay rates, and who do
not lead the same regular life. Ratepaying is a condi-
tion of the Reform Act, and you have had agitation
against rates by demagogues to excite the multitude,
and organisations against them ; but they have never
been abrogated, because the common sense of the people
has resolved to maintain them. Therefore, I think that the
charges against what are called securities are perfectly
fallacious, and made in ignorance of the character of our
countrymen; and there need be no apprehension that these
conditions will be otherwise than observed and guarded by
the very persons who by submitting to the conditions ob-
tain these privileges. The hon. and learned member for
Exeter made some rather remarkable observations. He
said he was entirely in favour of household suffrage, but
that the country was not yet prepared for it; and having
favoured us with his creed, he favoured us also with a cri-
ticism of our scheme of household franchise. He said that
all these restrictions can't last, and that it will resolve
itself into household suffrage. But how inconsistent this
criticism with the hon. gentleman's creed. (Laughter.)
If ho looks on a household suffrage as perfect, and regrets
that the country is not prepared, if we submit a scheme of
household suffrage with restrictions which he is sure will
break down, then surely be ought tocongratulate us on our
wise and consummate policy. (Cheers.) There was one
objection made by the noble lord the member for Stamford,
which was very severe on the measure which he opposed.
But it seemed to me that he proved too much. It might be
a very good argument against the measure, but it was also
an argument against all constitutional government. I will
not notice some remarks made by the hon. member for
Stoke-upon-Trent (Milßeresford-Hope) for he evidently
expected that I was going to make an elaborate reply to
him. (Laughter.) I can assure him I listened with the
greatest pleasure to the invectives he delivered against me.
Invective is a great ornament to our debates, but it re-
quires practice—(a laugh)—and, so far as my honour-
able friend displayed his talents to-eight, listened
with the greatest satisfaction. All his exhibitions in
this house are distinguished by a drollery which charms
me, and when -he talks of Asian mysteries I may tell
him that there is a Vathekian charm about his exer-
citatiode. (Laughter.) The right hon. gentlemap opposite

(Mr. Gladstone) is a candidate for power: and I know
nothing more legitimate than the ambition of such a man.
I can perfectly understand that under ordinary circum-

stances he should be emulous of the honour of dealing

with the question. But the present are not ordinary cir-
cumstances. The right hon. gentleman has had his
innings. (Cheers.) He has dealt with the subject of Par-
liamentary reform very recently, in a Parliament elected
under the auspices of a Government of which he was a
member, and with the support of a large majority. Under
these circumstances we have a right to expect that there

should be no eagerness in making party attacks. Now I
cannot but consider the amendments that have been placed
on the table a party attack, because they aro not amend-
ments to our bill, but a counter proposition. The right
hon. gentleman is justified in attacking the Government,
and I was justified in parrying it. I attempted to do so by
the letter which I addressed to my supporters, and which

has been so much misconstrued. The letter was not ad-

dressed to the House of Commons. As to the house, gene-

rally speaking, I wish on the part'of the Government to
say that so far as they are concerned, the Government
have never swerved from the sentiments that, with the
full concurrence of my colleagues, I expressed to them that

as we desire to co-operate with the house in bringing the
question of parliamentary ref Qin to a settlement, and that
although we could not swerve in regard to the borough
franchise from the personal payment of rate, yet, with re-
gard to almost every other point, we were anxious, in com-
mittee afterfair deliberation, to adopt the course which the
_ _ _

house in its wisdom might deem expedient and desirable.
We are conscious of the heavy task we have undertaken,

and how much wo must depend upon the assistance of the
house to bring the question of Reform to a happy oon-

elusion. But I really am a loss to know what are the con•

cessions of the right bon. gentleman (Mr. Gladstone). I
have been accused one night of givingiup everything, and
the next night of having given up nothing at all. But
there was an important point in our original proposition
which I reluctantly, at the desire of both sides of the

house, and particularly of my own friends, gave up. But
I am not conscious of any concessions having been made in
return. Whatever may be the course of the division, I
must repeat that the borough franchise in our bill is founded
upon a principle from which we cannot swerve. There is

nothing novel in saying that personal payment of rates and
adequate residence are the only conditions on which we
can consent to any arrangement of the borough franchise.

There are many amendments on the paper on which it
requires a considerable time to form an opinion ; and if
we had an opportunity, we should be most happy to con-
..

sider them during the holidays. We are most anxious to
change, modify, and adapt them in any practical mode

consistent with the general principles of our measure.
has been said that I pledged myself to introduce a lodger
franchise. I did not do so, for the very good season that
to introduce a lodger franchise that would be satisfactory
to the house and to the country is one of the most difficult
things in the world. All that I did say was that if a sen-
sible, well-considered proposition for a lodger franchise
was brought forward, we would candidly meet it, and if
it were established by argument, it might be adopted by
the house. The difficulty of dealing with thiS question,
which is by no means so easy as the right non. gentleman
(Mr. Gladstone) made out last year, may be illustraied by
my experience with the deputation of a society very much
under the patronage of the lion. member for Birmingham.
I mean the Reform League. They insisted on having a
lodger franchise ; but distinctly gave warning that if any
qualification, either in regard to the residence or value,
was attempted, they should look upon it as an insult.
(Laughter.) That is not an encouragement to anticipate
carrying a lodger franchise as easily as some honourable
members seem to imagine it may be carried ; but let it bo
brought forward by any gentleman who has thoroughly
mastered the subject, and he will find from me a candid
reception of the matter. This is very much our position
with regard to all the questions about which I have been
asked. I consider the question of the county franchise is
one which will have to be settled by this house after ample
discussion. In fact, it is impossible to settle any of these
matters by question and answer, apart from discussion.
The question of the compound householders is one which
requires great debating in committee before it can be
settled. Let it be discussed there. Then, again, with re-
gard to voting papers; on this matter we wished to con-
sult the feelings of the House of Commons. If the House
declares against this and other points, I shall, on the part
of my colleagues, give to their decisions all the considera-
tion they deserve. But let us have fair discussion and de
liberation. This is the spirit in which her Majesty's Go-
vernment wish to treat this question in regard to the House
of Commons. It is a disagreeable thing to distinguish be-
tween the house generally and the right hon. gentleman to
whom, as the head of his party, I wish to pay every
honour; but I am obliged to make that distinction—(cries
of " oh, oh")—because, between her Majesty's Government
and the House of Commons on this subject of reform there
was an understanding that wa wore mutually to co-opo-
rale, and by mutual confidence and co-operation to bring
about and carry a fair measure of reform. This is an
on the part of my colleagues, am
understanding. which I,
perfectly ready to fulfil ; and there is no suggestion which
has been made by hon. gentlemen, and which appears on
the papers, which will not receive from us all the conside-
ration which it deserves, with a desire to adopt it and
modify our measure to meet it. (Hear.) But when the right
hon. gentleman comes upon us suddenly with a counter
proposition to the main proposition of our bill, it is
im-
possible for me to close my eyes to the nature of the me
ment. (Cheers.) I have said of the right hon.
that I cannot see any way to agree to the propositions he he
with
the made. They would entirely oppose and interfere
the policy we recommend to the house ; and I trust thatth
the right hon. gentleman will clearly understand that the
distinction I have made I have not made in the heat
bate—because there is no heat, or at least I do
not feel
de-
any heat at this moment —(laughter)—but wish, on an
important division, that there should be a clearaihned'hanest
understanding between her Majesty's Govterenmrent and the
House of Commons on this matter of h
orm Bill.
(Cheers.) We have acted entirely in accordance
with our
representations to the house. We believed we had expe-
rienced from the house a true candour and a generous con-
sideration ; and we are anxious at this moment cordially to
co-operate with the House of Commons in the settlement
of this question. (Great cheering from the Ministerial,
and cheers and laughter from the Opposition benches.)
Mr. GLADSTONE said he held his position alader
of the Opposition by the free choice of the members of the
Opposition, and if the Chancellor of the Exchequer would
accept no proposition from him, he could not understand
He
how he would consult the house. thought the
majo-
rity ate
Government —who left office in June last, when th
of the house wished them to remain in it—were not
amenable to the charge now made againstreferring
them, that they
wished to turn out the Government.
arguments, he urged that if it were right to compound,
occupier should not be deprived
and
fh because
he franchise
he lived in a compound house ; if it were wrong to
compound let them alter the law.
he asked the house
one w
to adopt
tiwasonleihoefPperiermeipalneenwthateph-
plication, and w
nevercoidd
tobethe wrong.
It was that those whom Parliament
admitted
fran-
chise should be admitted on
personalne al terms. No bill laying
down the principle ofrating could be satisfac-
tory; and, limit or no limit to the suffrage, his objection
was the same.
Sir H. ED WARDS rose amidst loud cries of " Order"
and "Divide," to ask a question of the member for Not-
tingham, and hoped to have a straightforward answer. lie
wished to know whether that lion. gentleman, before
bringing forward the matter discussed earlier in the even-
ing, had gi;ren notice to Colonel Taylor—(order)—he meant
the hon. and gallant member for Dublin; and how and
when it was given.
Mr. BRAND, whose voice was drowned for some
minutes in a storm of cries for " Osborne," explained that
he had been asked by the nember for Nottingham to give
the member for Dublin notice that the matter would be
brought forward. He (Mr. Brand) had endeavoured to:ond
the hon. and gallant gentleman. (Laughter.) He was not
aware of the accident till the member for Nottingham sat
down.

Sir H. EDWARDS, amidst loud cries of "Order," asked
whether the member for Nottingham had ascertained if his
notice had been delivered.
Mr. B. OSBORNE—I am much obliged to the hon. gen-
tleman—I don't know whether ho is gallant or not—(laugh-
ter) -for the courtesy with which he has addressed this
question, and I will endeavour to give him a straightfor-
ward answer as he desires. On entering the house, about
five minutes after four, a statement was put into my hands.
[Sir
.H.EDWARDS : Who by 7] If the hon. gentleman is so
inquisitive, I will satisfy him privately. Not being able to
see the hon. and gallant member for Dublin, I went to the
hon. member for Lewes and begged him to communicate
the notice, expecting that they would meet iu their com-
mon duties in the lobby. I did not know then that an
accident had happened, or I should not have brought for-
ward the matter. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. DILLWICN attempted, amidst loud cries of "Order,"
to address the committee.
The CHAIRMAN interposed, and reminded the com-
mittee that the question was.the amendment on clause 3 of
the Reform Bill.
The committee then divided, when the numbers were—
Ayes 289
Noes 3lO
MajKity against the amendment —2l
The division occupied about a quarter of an hour,
and as the benches gradually filled with the hon.
gentlemen returning from the lobbies, the most in-
tense anxiety was displayed respecting the result.
The Tellers for the Ayes were the first to arrive,
and amid breathless suspense they handed in their
return to the clerk at the table. The nature of the
return was immediately communicated from one
member to another with almost electric rapidity,
and it was whispered that the Government had
commanded a majority. Erery face on the Minis-
terial side beamed with excitement and delightas the
tidings spread. So overpowering, indeed, was the
enthusiasm enkindled that hon, members evidently
experienced great difficulty in restraining their
emotions, apd a slight clapping of hands was