The Sun.
London, England, 1866-11-20 00:00:00

PRICE. 4d.
STAMPED sd.

the resolution, which was supported by Mr. Robert
Cooper, of Manchester, and Mr. R. D. Rusden,

treasurer of the National Reform Union, and was
unanimously adopted.
Mr. HUGH MASON, of Ashton-under-Lyne, then
moved :—" Seeing that the history of the Tory
party, and especially its conduct during the
recent session of Parliament, affords no reason-
able ground for expecting at its hands a
genuine and substantial measure of reform, this
conference would counsel the people carefully to
watch the proceedings of the Government of Lord
Derby in relation to this question ; and whilst giv-
ing to any proposals they may offer a fair and
candid consideration, to beware of being entrapped
by any mere semblanee, however specious, and to
oppose with all their might any bill which is not
calculated to rectify the present unequal and ano-
malous distribution of political power, and to make
the House of Commons fully and honestly repre-
sent the will of the nation." He did not think it
possible that any Reform Bill could be proposed by
the present Tory Government which would be
worthy of the consideration of advanced Reformers
like those in that room. If they did so, they were
a set of base hypocrites—a set of dishonest politi-
cians, and they had no business to be in the seat of
power at this moment. (Hear.) He thought the
very first thing that ought to be done in the next
session of Parliament was to propose a vote of no
confidence in the Government of Lord Derby, and
thus to attempt to rein Sate honest Reformers in
the seat of power. They expected a dissolution in
1867, and for the sake of the Reform cause he
would infinitely prefer that a dissolution should
take place with their own friends in power, and not
their enemies ; because there could be no question
that the Government of the day had a certain
amount of influence in certain boroughs, and Re-
formers were not in a position to throw that influ-

ence away. (Hear.) But the mistake was made :
Lord Derby was admitted to power, and they must
now discuss the plan of putting him out. (A
laugh.) He thought this was simply. a question of
money. He believed they had before them, in order
to obtain a substantial Reform Bill, a very large
amount of hard work, and a very great expenditure
of money. He could quite imagine that a Reform
Bill of a kind such as was proposed by Mr. Glad-
stone might pass the House of Commons at an
earlier day than five years hence, but he could not
believe that such a Reform Bill would pass the
House of Lords. He believed the House of Lords
would send back a Reform Bill more than once or
twice. This was a question of intelligent agitation,
and he thought the great point with them should be,
How can we best raise £50,000 ? If they had any
faith that a reform bill was necessary, if they had
any faith that a reform bill would be greatly bene-
ficial to this country, and would help forward its
career of dignity and honour, and usefulness and
civilisation; was £50,000 too- much to spend ?
(Cheers.) He believed the money question settled
the question of the bread tax, and he had no doubt
whatever that the money question would settle the
question of reform.
Mr. ROBERT PLATT, of Stalybridge, seconded the
resolution. He, amidst the cheers of the meeting,
promised £l,OOO, saying that he did the same on the
resuscitation of the Anti-Corn-Law League.
Mr. ILLINGWORTII, of Bradford, spoke at some
length in support of the resolution.
Mr. lIADFIELD (Bradford) urged thai a subscrip-
tion should be raised among working men in sup-
port of the cause. If a million working men sub-
scribe Is. each, that would be £50,000. (Hear,
hear, and cries of " We will do it.")
Mr. FREDERICK HARPER (Manchester) moved as
an amendment the substitution of the following
words for the last clause of the resolution :—" And
to oppose any measure submitted to it which is not
equally extensive and honest to that submitted by
the late Government, and in that ease to urge a voto
of want of confidence by the House of Commons."
(Cheers.) The present Government had come in
by.false pretences, but they should not turn them
out by false pretences ; but when they found that
the Government would not give them a measure
equal to that which they opposed, they should tell
them to their faces that their places must be filled
by men in whose honesty the people of England had
more confidence. (Hear, hear.)
The appearance of Mr. Hadfield, M.P., on the
platform at this stage of the proceedings was the
signal for loud and enthusiastic cheering.
Mr. SCHOFIELD (Oldham) asked if the mover and
seconder of the resolution could not substitute a
different for the obnoxious clause ? If not, he should
be disposed to second the amendment.
Mr. RUSDEN said the amendment was far weaker
than the original resolution, for he hoped they had
no shadow of an intention to accept a bill which
should only be " equal" to the last. (Hear, hear).
It would only be an invitation to the present Go-
vernment to bring forward some such poor, weak
measure as that. (Cheers.)
Mr. J. WAINWRIGHT (Salford) thought it was
time that a temporising policy was done away with ;
and, though the resolution might in some respects
be objectionable, yet in these trying times, when
they had so many different parties to accommodate,
it was difficult to frame a resolution better calcu-
lated to obtain general support.

Mr. J. SPENCER (:Manchester) suggested that the
latter clause of the resolution should be left out
altogether.

Mr. CHILMAN (Hull) considered that there was
little difference between the platform of the League
and the Union ; and, as both parties meant the same
thing, they should go together as far as they could.
Mr. SNOWDON (Halifax) approved of the resolu-
tion in its integrity, as did also Mr. FARMER (Long-
ton, Staffordshire).
Mr. WEBSTER (Rochdale) thought the Tories were
at variance with the people, not only on the question
of reform, but on every politico-religious, or social
question. (Hear, hear.) The reformers of Lanca-
shire, however, could not urge their claims with
effect so long as so many Tories were returned from
the borough and divisional constituencies of the
county ; and they should work in their respective
localities to unseat these Tories, and return Liberals
in their places.
Sir FRANCIS CROSSLEY, M.P., said that some
think that
gentlemen who had spoken seemed
to think
the same
moving a vote of no confidence was
thing as carrying it. (Laughter
asked Lord
andif they
however, was a great mistake.
ld serve them best,
Derby or Mr. Disraeli what Nytohaey
would like better
he thought there was nothin mucheheers.) That,
make such a motion
than for some one to be
the House of Commons
3 rtunity of saying what
before they had had an oprear,
hear.) He thought
to clod. (11
snogdfoolish as to get up in
they were going
the conference It appeared to him to
)ell to pass the resolution
as it stood. (Ileac, hear.)
h great consideration—with
have been drawn.
ation than it was possible to
much more conside.r
would
0. of this kind, and to strike
h eoa rw.
(Tire in a large ineetin,,
oreferred to would
rather strengthen
out the clause
than otherwise. (Cheers.)
nests their oppone
Mr. W.ilinersley (Hast-
ings), a few words from
Schofield, and Mr. Monck (Wiirrington)
ings), gr.
was withdrawn, and the resolution
the amendment w.
carried unanimously.
Mr. JEFFREY (Liverpool) then moved the third
resolution :—" This conference recommends that a
committee be appointed to make a digest of the vari-
ous reform measures that have been introduced since
the act of 1832, and to prepare for public conside-
ration the outlines of a bill or bills." He did not
agree with those who claimed the vote as a right.
Let men work out their own redemption and per-
form the duties of citizens before they claimed the
rights of citizens. A man usually served an appren-
ticeship to a trade, and it would be as reasonable to
claim his indentures without service as to claim the
vote by right. He condemned strongly the proceed-
ings in the registration courts, by which so many