The Sun.
London, England, 1867-10-30 00:00:00

now, what happened during the seven memorable
years that elapsed from 1859 to 1865 when Lord
Derby was again called into power, and when he
did me the honour to ask me again to attempt to
lead the House of Commons? (Cheers.) Observe
what has occurred in Parliament on the subject of
reform during these seven years. They commenced
with the measure of Lord Palmerston in 1860 ;
that failed, and these seven years ended with the
measure of Lord John Russell. That also failed,
and in the interval there were all these separate
motions of Mr. Locke King and Mr. Baines. Con-
sequently during these seven years the question of
Parliamentaryßeform was before the public mind
and under the examination of Parliament. Dur-
ing that period of seven years, with the advice, I
may say under the instructions of my colleagues,
I expressed the principles upon which any measure
of Parliamentary Reform ought to be established.
Now, mark this, because these are things which you
may not have beard in any speech which has been
made in the city of Edinburgh. (Laughter and
cheers.) I had to prepare the mind of the country,
and to educate—if it be not arrogant to use such a
phrase—to educate our party. It is a large party,
and requires its attention to be called to questions
of this kind with some pressure. I had to prepare
the mind of Parliament and the country on this
question of Reform. This was not only with the
concurrence of Lord Derby, but of my colleagues.
The first great point which it was my duty always
to impress upon Parliament was that we should
listen to nothing that was not a complete and com-
prehensive measure, that all the points of the subject
of Parliamentary Reform should be treated together,
because we knew that upon our treating them de-
pended the political equilibrium which has hitherto
prevailed in this country. That is the first ques-
tion. What is the second ? During these
seven years I had to vindicate the principles
on which disfranchisement and enfranchise-
ment should take place. I said, "We cannot
listen for a moment to the reasons assigned for
grouping boroughs. We cannot say that the
representation of any place should be entirely
abrogated." We insisted in our bill that no centre
of representation should be abolished, and we said,
"For the increased representation you want in Eng-
land you must look to a certain class of boroughs,
no doubt, to give up a portion of their claim." And
what was the third question ? It was whether any
Parliamentary reform could be satisfactory, unless
you had a real and bona fide Boundary Commission.
What was the fourth point? 'That justice should
be done to the representation of the majoritj of the
English nation who live in counties, and that it
should be done not merely by giving representation
to the great towns which have sprung into im-
portance since Lord Grey's Act of 1832, but by
adding a considerable number directly to their re-
presentatives. What was the fifth point ? We in-
sisted upon, and supported by our vote, that the
borough franchise should be established on the prin-
ciple of rating. (Cheers.) These are the five
points which, for seven weary and toilsome years, I
have, with the entire concurrence and at the instiga-
tion of those who share your confidence, endea-
voured in the House of Commons to impress upon
the conscience and conviction of Parliament. There
was a change of Government. Lord Derby came
into power, and, having to consider the state of the
country, it was his opinion that it was necessary to
bring in a Reform Bill. Well, we brought in a Re-
form Bill. (Cheers.) We passed a Reform Bill.
(Loud cheers.) And now I ask you to consider
whether the five points which for seven years on
the part of Lord Derby were impressed on the
country were obtained or not. Our Reform Bill
was a complete and comprehensive measure. We
did vindicate the principles on which enfranchise-
ment and disfranchisement should take place. We
had no grouping, we did not abolish entirely
the representation of any place, but we did ap-
peal successfully to certain boroughs to give their
surplusage of representation to supply the wants
of other constituencies. We did justice to the
counties; we did issue a Boundary Committee,
which has examined, and is examining, the
Parliamentary boundaries of every borough. And,
fifthly, and lastly, we did establish a suffrage
for the boroughs which was founded upon the prin-
ciple of rating. (Cheers.) And then I am told, when
the policy which we recommended for the country
for seven years has been so triumphantly carried
into effect, that we have done nothing, and that it
is our opponents who have carried the bill. I can
only say this—that if you had seen the countenance
of the gentleman who had recently made a speech
in this city when I did carry that bill—(great
laughter and cheers)—you would not have read in
those lineaments the triumph of the Liberal party
after their toils of 70 years. (Loud laughter.) I
must say 1 never saw such a command over the
exultation which is natural and peculiar to man
whe❑ he succeeds in an object dear to his heart and
to his country. (Laughter and cheers.) But, gen-
tlemen, let us not in the exultation of party cease to
be impartial in the consideration of a great measure.
It may be said, and it will be said, " What you say
is very true ; you carried your fifth point, which
nobody can deny, but your fifth point involves all
your treason. True it is you have established the
franchise of boroughs on the principle of rating, but
you have established the democratic government in
England, because you have established household
suffrage, and then you have gone much further
than the measure you previously opposed." Now,
let us see if there is anything in that. lam not at
all prepared to admit that in establishing household
suffrage with the conditions of residence and rating,
upon which we have insisted, we have established a
democratic government. (Cheers.) But it is unne-
cessary to enter into that consideration, because we
have not established household suffrage in Eng-
land. There are, I believe, about 4,000,000 houses-
in England, and under our ancient laws, and under
the act of Lord Grey, about 1,000,000 of the occu-
piers possess the franchise. Under the act of 1867
something more than 500,000 were added to that
million. Well, then, I want to know, if there are
4,000,000 of householders, and only 1,500,000 have
suffrage, how can household suffrage be established in
England ? You may question my statements, but
they have been prepared by those who have been ap-
pointed by the Liberal party. I have seen an esti-
mate given by a man of extreme and advanced

opinions, and than whom no man is more acquainted