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

lAL
pARIIXP
BR ja rs yr

HOUSE OF LORDS—LAST EVENING.
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at
five o'clock.
OF THE PEOPLE BILL.
REPRESENTATION
On the motion of the Earl of MA.LMESBITRY for going
into committee,
Lord HALIFAX rose and tithe redistribution
following amend-
ment—" That, with regard to the redistribution of seats
the proposed scheme is inadequate, and that it is ex-
expedient to provide the means of giving more representa-
tives to large and important constituencies than was given
by the bill, and said that if he adopted another plan to
the one which he had now adopted, he should have incurred
the censure of the noble lords. He was actuated by one
motive only, that was that this question might be settled as
satisfactorily and speedly as possible (Hear, hear.) Ho
thought that the other side of the house was more likely to
carry such a measure than they on that side were. It was
Government only that could effect this. The motion he
had put on the paper was therefore no party motion. He was
a man of party, and if he meant this motion as such he
should have avowed it to be so. But that this matter was
above party feeling he would not have brought forward a
rival scheme, for that would be a party motion. He
thought that with regard to the redistribution of seats the
scope of the bill was inadequate, and on that ground alone
he brought forward this motion, and without any reference
to party whatever. (Hear, hear.) He wished, before he
went to the question of redistribution of seats, to say one
word about the other side of the bill The Government
had proposed a very large measure of Reform, and he had
to say for one that with it he was perfectly satisfied. He
had none of those fears with regard to the operations of
the bill which had been expressed in that house. He consi-
dered that there would be no abuse of the privileges
conferred by the scheme. He only wished that
the other half of the bill had been conceived in the same
liberal spirit. With reference to the discussion on the
bill, he would ask would they merely register the opinion
of the other house of Parliament, and not discuss the
question themselves because it had come to them
late in the year? He thought not. If any borough should
lose its seat through disfranchisement, which was under
the influence of a member of that house, it would be a
grateful concession on the part of their lordships to allow of
the increase of redistribution that would produce this change.
He proceeded then to point out the prominent de-
fects in the scheme. It would give in large boroughs
certain extra members, but in the small boroughs
hardly any alteration would take place. There
,sere 10 boroughs which had only 5,000 each,
the population of the whole amounting to 38,000 ;
and six of these boroughs had less in population than
they had in 1831. Then there was the borough of Liver-
pool having a population of 440,000, 11 times the popu-
lation that of the whole ten boroughs just alluded to ;
and there was an increase in the borough of Wolverhampton
almost as great. It would be seen that as the largo
boroughs had increased so had the smaller ones di-
minished. He should like to see certain districts cut up
into equal proportions with an equal number of members.
As under the present scheme there would be the same
lumber of members to a county having 150,000
nhalitamts as there would be in one having only 30,000
or 40,000, he would rather see that there should be a
proportionate number of members to each division. The
noble lord then contrasted the boroughs which were
to have additional members with the boroughs which
were not mentioned in the bill, and stated that there wore
many of these boroughs which really had a larger popula-
tion ; for instance, there was the borough of Darlington,
which had 15,000, and that of Stockton 13,000 population,
while many towns around had far larger populations. A
prima facie case, therefore, was made out against the
scheme, which was that it was unfair and inadequate.
These were not solitary cases, there were many similar
ones. He thought he had shown them that the scheme
of the Government with regard to the smaller
boroughs was unequal, and that it was likely to
cause discontent throughout the country. If he had satis-
fied their lordships that there was just cause that some
alteration should be made in that portion of the bill he was
satisfied. In conclusion, he impressed upon their lordship w
s
the policy of availing themselves of the opportunity no
presented for making the redistribution part of the measure
coincident with the scope of the enlarged fnchise, and
thus place the settlement of the question tints more per-
manent basis.
The Earl of MALNIESBURY expressed his sense of his
inability to fill the place of the Premier, and, having asked
the indulggnce of the house, replied briefly to the charges
of inconsistency made against the Government the other
night, and said he had never expressed an opinion on Par-
liamentary Reform. At the time of the passing of the Re-
form Bill he was too young to have any opinion on the sub-
ject, but he well recollected that the intention was no doubt
the generous wish to enlarge the suffrages and constituen-
cies, but there was also a second one—to prevent a Tory
Government from coming in as long as possible. Thoy
succeeded in both objects. The Conservative party ac-
cepted the measure, and everything went on quietly until
the second object was frustrated by time. Then for the first
time the noble earl opposite began to grumble, and the
country was told that a new Reform Bill was necessary.
Without following out one bill after another, the country
found it was a see-saw, and grew weary of the procrastina-
tion. When the Conservative party proposed to bring
down the county franchise to the level of the boroughs it
was negatived. When last year they had to meet nothing
but a sliding scale of reform, it became obvious not only to
him but to thousands that the only resting place was house-
hold suffrage. That was the explanation he had to offer,
so far as the Opposition was concerned. But he had now
to turn to what fell the other night from tho noble earl his
late colleague, who aceused him of holding secret opinions
in favour of household suffrage, and therefore being an
organised hypocrite.
The Earl of CARNARVON—I beg my noble friend's
pardon, but he is putting words into my mouth 1 never
used.

The Earl of MALMESBURY certainly understood him
to say that if the Conservative party hold secret opinions
in favour of household suffrage it was an organised hypo-
crisy. (Hear, hear.) What is the great difference ? Al-
though anything but an impartial authority on the sub-
ject, the noble lord's memory would doubtless enable him
to bear testimony to the fact that long before the question
of reform was discussed in the Cabinet, long before they
became colleagues, when ho (Lord Malmesbury) paid him a
visit in the country, they had a long conversation in which
he told the noble earl in distinct terms that he thought
there was no resting-place but household suffrage, and
that it was the only hope of passing a Reform Bill. He
not only had that conversation, but he wrote a long letter
on the subject, and gave reasons in favour of his opinion
which he would now repeat to the House. In a Conser-
vative sense he advocated household suffrage. He believed
that if Republican principles exist (and he trusted that the
extreme principles are only held by a few) they are enter-
tained by that class in the category between .£7 and house-
hold suffrage. Generally speaking, they are not friends of
the Church, but dissenters, of strong opinions. (Laughter.)
The class immediately below them is a very loyal one.
A noble earl the other night said, that many of this class
are so ignorant that they do not know the name of the in-
cumbent of their parish. If that be so, it cannot be said
that there is any ono of them who does not know the name
of the Sovereign. (A laugh.) They are contented, and
like the throne ; and even should the Sovereign at times
be personally ucpopular, they have never despised the
throne. But with the other, to which he had referred,
it is very different; the Sovereign may be popular, but
they distrust the throne. He always thought there aro
only two principles to be considered on entering on the
question of Parliamentary Reform—the principle whether
the suffrage is to be universal or restricted. When we
came to a restricted suffrage, that is a mere matter of
detail, and a man must judge according to the circum-
stances of the time. A great deal has been lately said in
the way of prophecy. In fact, their lordships have be-
come such famous prophets that the House will likely be
consulted by the public on future events, and will stand
before the country rather as an oracular than a
legislative assembly. He had very little faith,
however, in such prophecy, except when the pro-
phet has it in his power to carry his vaticina-
tions into execution. The noble viscount who has just
sat down is one of these. He says that he looks to this
measure as one that cannot be permanent. But what is
permanent; is there anything jpermanent but change ?
See in what position the measure stands, and if the re-
commendations just made can really be carried out. He
asked the house not to look at this as by any moans a
perfect measure. In the nature of things it could not be
so. If it had not been a bill of compromise it could never
have arrived at this point. Ithas been under the considera-
tion of the House of Commons for five months. Will the
House of Lords at the eleventh hour tamper with the bill,
the work of so many laborious weeks and nights—of so
much diplomatic skill on both sides ? Would it be discreet
and becoming of the Hones of Lords to interfere with a
question so intimately connected with the House of Com-
mons in the way proposed? (Hear, hear.) The noble
viscount proposes to disfranchise all the boroughs below
5,000.
Lord HALIFAX did not propose any number.
The Earl of MALMESBURY observed, that only in-
creased the difficulty by raising an abstract proposition.
Then the noble earl on the cross bench (Earl Grey) has
another proposition for the disfranchisement of 22
boroughs. But if the noble viscount does not state any
figure, surely it is not the business of the House of
Lords to fill up the blanks in his resolution. Suppose
again that the 22 prizes are thrown opon, on what coast
are they to be stranded—on Ireland, Scotland, or England?
It is really nothing less than a new Reform Bill. (Hear,
hear.) You cannot ask the House of Commons, already
beginning to disperse, to consider the question over again ;
and
we_
uncertainty.shotld, therefore, be all thrown again into the
chaos uncertainty.intY. There is this strong reason against
the f
amended, proposition
unanimously
of the noble viscount, that the bill, when
Did any noble lord think ouslyPassed the House of Commons.
that any Government could send
down to the House of C
altered as the noble viscounto mdmeosirns a
ea?
as extensivelyso
ty that