The Sun.
London, England, 1867-08-07 00:00:00

LAPERIAL PARLIAMENT

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

PRIVATE BUSINESS
The Bristol Port Railway and Pier (Amendments) Bill
was road a third time.
THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE BILL.
On the motion for the third reading of this bill,
Lord RAVENS WORTH said that though it might ap-
pear to their lordships right and proper to alter the deci-
sion which had been come to by the house on the ques-
tion of the lodger franchise, still he must protest
against any such alteration. He considered that the lodger
franchise had nothing to do with the material elements
of the bill, and ultimately he was afraid that it would be
found that the introdnetion of it would be accompanied
with a great deal of harm. He thoroughly concurred with
the noble earl (Shaftesbury) who sat on the lower benches,
and who knew better than any one what was the condi-
tion of the working classes. He could safely affirm
that the men to whom the franchise was now
offered were not their own masters, and that
hey would in any contested election take advantage of
the power which had been given them. In the face of
the tremendous revelations which the inquiry as to
Trades' Unions had just made public, he could hardly
conceive how such a suggestion as a lodger franchise
could be received by either House of Parliament. The
noble lord then stated that he considered it most unfair
that the University of London should have a member ap-
portioned to it, and that the University of Durham should
have none. That university was every day increasing
in its scope of usefulness, and had even now a medical
school attached to it. He would trouble their lordships on
one more point only, and that was the clause as to
minorities, or the three cornered franchise, as it was
called. Cf this clause he fully approved, for it would
nullify the effect of the franchise which they were about
now to give. But he woulg say something about the
members for the coanty of Durham. That county now
returned ten members to Parliament, eight of whom were
Liberals, but it was proposed to give them
three new members, this would give rise to a great pre-
ponderance on the part of one party, and would require the
fullest system of minorities to provide an equality. With
these remarkshoevould leave the matter in their lordships'
hand'.
Lord REDESDALE said that if this question of Reform
was not now finally settled it might at any time give rise
to a discussion as the means of accomplishing some poli-
tical purpose. In this matter he entirely advocated the
finality principle, and trusted that, although the bill had
been termed too liberal, it would not on any subsequent
oneasion be made a party principle. It was a most im-
portant question, and ought to be settled definitely.
Earl FORTESCUE said that he could not understand
any redistribution of seats until the franchise was extended
to every householder in counties as well as towns. Until
this was done there would be no fair distribution of the
franchise.
Lord LYVEDEN said that he was surprised to bear
the sentiments' of the noble lord (Redesdale) with regard
to the leaders of the opposition party of the house. He
warmly retorted on. the Government the painful and al-
most humiliating position in which they had phiced their
lordships by passing one day by an overwhelming majority
an important clause, and within a few days after their
deliberate decision asking them to rescind it. He solemnly
and earnestly repudiated the doctrine laid down by Lord
Redesdale that it was not within the authority and pro-
vince of their lordships to consider and decide upon ques-
tions of disfranchisement affecting the representation of
the other house.
Lord REDESDALE offered an explanation of what he
bad said, but repeated his first assertion that it was a
dangerous precedent to set before the lower house.
After a few words from Lord DENMAN,
Lord RUSSELL said he did not, of course, intend to
oppose the third reading. Under the present bill there
might, indeed, be a great increase of bribery and corrup-
tion, for a large number of the new electors to be placed
on the list were both poor and ignorant. This undoubt-
edly might be the case; but further than this ho did not
apprehend other evils, and still less did he join in the
gloomy forebodings of those.who looked on the British
Constitution as gone. He apprehended no such danger.
The immense majority of the people were deeply attached
to the Constitution, and, when admitted to a share in its
electoral working, would form its strongest safeguard.
His lordship then proceeded to review the redistribution
scheme, and dwelt on the changes and alterations which
the Government had so constantly made in their plans,
and which bad led to the retirement of three prominent
members of the Cabinet. The tactics of the Government
had been unprecedented. While out of office their cry had
always been that the Liberal bills wont too far, and now
they had passed a measure mole radical than any yet
brought forward.
I The question that the bill be read a third time was then
put, and was on the point of passing, whin Lord STRATRE-
DEN, calling "Non-content," rose and addressed their lord-
ships at length, genei ally taking a review of all the chief
elections since 1832 at which popular or eminent candidates
had lost their seats. His lordship's remarks were listened
to with much impatience. He concluded by moving that
certain seats be kept vacant to afford seats for those mem-
bers who might be rejected by other constituencies, but
whom, their services being of value to the country, the
House of Commons should have power by their standing
orders to elect as representatives of those special seats be-
fore mentioned. •
Lord DERBY, in a bantering way, pointed out the ridi-
culous nature of the clause they were asked to adopt, and
said that, witkout disrespect to Lord Stratheden, it would
be mere waste of words to explain at length the utterly
impracticable nature of a scheme which really struck at the
whole system of representation.
The clause was then negatived nem. con.
In reply to a resolution, moved by Lord HAIL-
ROWBY, that the new borough should be called Ken-
sington instead of Chelsea, Lord DERBY said he
had not the slightest objection to the name being
changed if it was thou.iht to be a matter of such im-
portance that the opinion of the other house should be
taken on it.
On the motion that the bill do pass,
Lord DERBY, in a few graceful words, expressed his
thanks to their lordships for tho spirit of conciliation and
impartiality with which they had discussed the measure
now about to pass. After an experience of more than
forty-five years in both Houses of Parliament, he never
recollected a bill of such surpassing importance and mag-
nitude of interest which had been discussed with more
calmness and less of party spirit. They were trying a great
experiment, the result of which was hidden in the future,
but he had sufficient confidence and belief in the steadi-
ness and loyalty of the great mass of his fellow-country-
men to believe that they would worthily exercise their
electoral rights, and that the extended basis of their repre-
sentative system would prove to be the firmest after all.
The motion that the bill do pass was then carried

MM. con.
On the third reading of the Railway Guards and Pas-
sengers Communication Bill, Lord Lucan moved that ft be
read a third time on that day three months, which Lord
Kimberley opposed, and eventually, after some discussion,
the bill was withdrawn, on the assurance of the Duke of
Richmond that the subject should receive full considera-
tion next year.
The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and
their lordships adjourned at a quarter to 8 o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—LAST EVENING.
The Si:TAT/FR took the chair at 2 o'clock.
THE ALABAMA.
Mr. REARDON asked the Secretary of State for Foreign
Affairs whether the promised correspondence between ber
Majesty's Government and the Government of the United
States relating to the Confederate steamship Alabama
would bo laid upon the table of that house before the close
of the session ?
Lord STANLEY said it was his intention to lay the
papers on the table before the close of the session.