The Sun.
London, England, 1866-06-01 00:00:00

CHILL

Mr. LIDDELL asked the Under Secretary of State for
Foreign Affairs whether it was true that the Chilian Mi-
nister had demanded his passports; and, if so, what were
the grounds for this rupture of friendly relations with that
Government ?

Mr. LAYARD said the Chilian Minister had not de-
manded his passports ; but ho had presented a letter of re-
call. His Excellency did not assign any reason for such a
proceeding. From communications that had been received
by her Majesty's Government, he did not anticipate any
Interruption in the friendly relations that at present existed
between Chili and England.

VISITORS FROM CHINA.
Colonel SYKES asked the Under Secretary of State for
Foreignar andxten
AffairswirlkrtihrideueeruPn and his son Yo-ho, and their
Tart
accom-
panied Mr. Hart, the Ira from Pekin, who had
rtted to the British ial Inspector of Customs, and
were nowinEngland,we
Govern-
nient in any official capacity,
from or
were merely recommended
to its courtesies as travellers
Mr. LAYARD had to state that these e gentle-
men were not accredited to this country any official ca-
of the
i
pacity, but they had come on the recommendation
Chinese Government to see the country
and the jute-
resting features in it. Her Majesty's Government
such circumstances would do all they could to inshound7
visit pleasant. (Hear, hoar.) He believedshort Tx.
there would be a more formal visit, which he hoped wowed
lead to a state of things which would be of great benefit
to both countries.

CHURCH RATES.
Mr. F. SURTEES asked the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer if the Compulsory Church Rate Abolition Bill
became law whether it would deprive, or not deprive, the
vicar of Stockton-on-Tees for the time being of the sum
of £2O a-year, which was settled on him "for ever here-
after" byan Act of Parliament passed in the reign of Queen
Arm, ?
clauses s
Ter of the EXCHEQUER said the
matter
w...,8 entirely beside the influence of the Compulsory
Church
sed l
Rate Abolition Bill. If the hon. gentleman should
feel dispo to move
matter, suet, the insertion of clauses to meet the
would receive the best consideration.
'PRE REFORM BILL.
Mr. GOLDSMID,
mittee on RepresentatLn the
motion for going into Com-
of Seats Bill, moved, °L, (), the People and Redistribution
proposal
of
at this house is of opinion
the Government to
that, if the
thgan to
Bthe census of 1861,
boroughs having, accorculn
000,
ailchen bad a popular
a population of less
whiCh return two
is expedient that all boroughs Whir° be adopted, it
tion above 8,000, but under 10,
tiltnd that all
members, should henceforth return only;oponepiliatio
groups of boroughs, the combined
according to the said census, was above 10,000 °I which,
future return two members to this house."
, should in
Mr. GOSCHEN said the amendment of the holt°
able gentleman -v.- ho had just sat down Was 'I:-
marl:ably distinguished from that of the honourable nde-
gallant member for Wolk, bectrale in the one there
were a number of -vague generalities, whilst in- the other
the honourable gentleman who had just sat down thought
he had discovered a blot in the bill and he had gone directly
to it. He thought, however, that the boa member who had
brought forfrard the amendment was rather in a pecu-
liar position of hardship, because he himself represented
one of the boroughs which came just within the line
of the Government measure. JD ni ton, B ridport,
and Lyme Regis possessed as large a populaton it was true,
but no great measure could pass through Parliament with-
out indicting hardship on some parties. (hear, hear)
however, there was one consolation to the 511;1411 boroughs

it was pr.oposed to group, and it was this,
viz., thatin
Place of disfranchisement, which they must have expected,
they mere to be banded together, and thus, to a certain ex-
text% retain their voice in the Legislature ~1 the country.
He. denied that the Government had arranged the dis-
tribution of seats upon any but the fairest principles, and
instead of attacking the
principle of the bill the great party
opposite confined their powers to matters of procedure
and obstruction. The amendment of the hon. and gallant
member for Wells was neither more nor less than a mo-
tion for delay—(hear, hear)—and one of its great charac-
teristics was the circumstance he had stated. The Go-
vernment the bill, had been actuated but by
onopeinci in framingple,tat was impartiality—(hear)—and he defied
hon. gentlemen opposite to show him one portion of the
bill where that great and- just proposal was not the dis-
tinguishing characteristic of the Government measure.
He thought one of the grounds for considering the bill
was the distance from each other of the boroughs grouped,
but hon. members seemed to forget that the boroughs
in Scotland were situated at a much greater distance
from each other than those dealt with in
the bill of the Government. (Hear, hear.) He
contended that the counties had been fairly dealt with
in the bill of the Government (Cries of " No, no" from
the Opposition.) If that was not the fact, what was the
amendment complaining of the injustice done to the
counties ? (Cheers from Ministerialists.) The amend-
ment of the hon. and gallant member for Wells did not go to
the principle of the bill, and the Government would there-
fore not accept a defeat on such a proposition, because it
dealt with matters which could be disposed of in com-
mittee. He defended the Government scheme from every
attack made against it, and contended that it was based on
fairness and honesty, and concluded by rebuking those
Liberal members who had forsaken their colours to carry
their owa peculiar crotchets.
Sir J. PABINGTON defended the Opposition from un-
fair hostility. He thought, however, now that the whole
bill was before them, they should come to a settlement as
early as possible. He blamed the Government for their
tardiness, and now that the debate was assuming a more
extensive character, he would assert that, in his estima-
tion, the whole bill was a fallacy. Although the Govern-
ment had gone to all the expense of collecting statistics,
they brought forward their Reform Bill before they actu-
ally obtained them, the result of IN hich was, that they had
brought forward an incomplete and ineffective measure.
After reviewing the various modes of sending members to
Parliament, he said he was willing to extend the franchise
far beyond that proposed by the Government; but his
idea was that contentment was the great thing to be
thought of ; and the redistribution of seats, which formed
part of the new Reform Bill, was liable to create discontent
throughout many parts of the country. If this bill passed
envy and excitement would be general, and very few per-
sons would be satisfied. One great objection he had to
this bill was the taking away seven seats from England
and handing them over to Scotland. Referring to reform
in general, he said the Conservatives had been accused of
false pretences; but he thought that charge could more
fairly be flung at the Government, who for six long years
had promised them reform, which they delayed from time
to time, and eventually brought forward in a crippled and
stinted form. He then personally alluded to the conduct
of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whom he attacked in no
very measured terms, and terminated a very long speech
by stating that, the bill in its present form, could never
pass, and he asked the house to support the amendment,
and thus show the Government that they were not to be
trifled with.

Mr. MlLL—Since hon. gentlemen opposite, one after
another, in considerable numbers, have shown so strong a
desire to consider not so much the question before us as
what I have said on the subject, and since they have bees
anxious to know what course I am going to take, I should
be sorry to refuse any hon. gentleman so simple a request.
I must rectify a mistake that has been made by the right
hon. baronet, as to the reason why I had not been per-
suaded to speak on the motion of the hon. member for
Northamptonshire. I had various reasons, and the one I
have the least hesitation in stating to the house is a decided
disinclination to be made a catspaw cf. (Loud cheers.) What
other reasons I had may appear in the few observations I
have to make, and which will be directed to hon. gentlemen
who have given so much attention to my works. No doubt
it is veryflattering to hear one's writings continually quoted,
but that feeling is much lessened on finding that hon. gen-
tlemen's knowledge of those writings is strictly limited to
the passages they quote. (Laughter.) No doubt they
made the attempt, but found it too dull to read further.
Hon. gentlemen are aware that amongst other things I
have suggested plurality of votes as a proper part of cer-
tain systems of government. But I would like to know
where any gentleman found I had ever required such
checks against the £7 franchise. (Hear, hear.) The pro-
position that I made had reference to a state of universal
suffrage, when it appeared to me that certain things would
be necessary iu order to prevent the mere ascendancy of a
class. Is there any danger that the working classes will
have this ascendancy on the 17 franchise ? The only effect
this can have is, that instead of creating an ascendancy it
will in some degree weaken the ascendancy of a class.
(Hear, hear.) Therefore there is no reason to apply the
checks which I ventured to suggest. The representation
of minorities is not intended as a check on democracy alone.
It is good in itself. It is a check against whatever is the
stronger power in the constitution. It is a check on the
power of whatever is uppermost. It is absolutely neces-
sary in democracy. Without the representation of the mi-
norities there is a part of the community, it may be half,
which is absolutely disfranchised, and which for all prac-
tical purposes might as well have no votes. Suppose that
a House of Commons is elected by a bare majority of the
people, and that this house passes laws by a bare majority
of itself. The minority out of doors and the minority in-
doors, wo must all agree, would leave little more than a
quarter of the community to outvote the others. On the
principle of democracy, therefore, the representation of mi-
norities is necessary in order to work thoroughly well. I
wish to give a brief explanation of a passage which the right
hon. baronet has quoted from one of my writings, which
has some appearance of being less polite in its language
thanl should wish always to be in speaking of a great party.
The passage he quoted is one where I stated that the Con-
servative party was by the law of its constitution neces-
sarily the stupidest party. (Laughter.) I never meant to
say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant
to say that stupid persons are generally Conservative. (Re-
newed laughter.) I believe that is so obviously and univer-
sally admitted a principle that I hardly think any hon..
gentleman will deny it. Suppose any party, in addition
to whatever share it may possess of the ability of the com-
munity, has nearly the whole of its stupidity, that party
must, by the law of its constitution, be the stupidest party
—(laughter)—and I don't see why hon. gentlemen should
see that position at all offensive to them, for it ensures their
being always an extremely powerful party. (Laughter.) I
know I am liable to a retort, and an obvious one enough,
and as I do not wish to allow any hon. gentleman the credit
of making it 1 make it myself. It may be said that if stu-
pidity has a tendency to Conservatism, sciolisms or half
knowledge has a tendency to Liberalism. Something might
be said for that, but it is not at all so clear as the
other. There is an uncertainty about sciolists ; we cannot
count upon them ; and therefore they are a less dangerous
class. But there is so much dense, solid force in sheer stu-
pidity, that any body of able men with that force pressing
behind them may ensure victory in many a struggle ; and
many a victory the Conservative party has gained through
that power. I only rose for the purpose of this personal
explanation, and I do not propose to enter into the merits
of the amendment, especially as I concur in all that has
been said in the admirable speech of the right hon. gentle-
man the member for London. (Cheers.)
The debate was carried on before empty benches dur-

ilingr.tlaheewdhinranye,r.
thhoeulrsattbeyr
ef Mr.w hSecmouarttetledd,
tMhai;.
itßwaxastehr,igahnlyd
erratic to take the census of 1861 to base new constitu-
encies upon. He instanced Darlington and Stockton,
where the population increased year by year, and said
that both those towns had within the last five years
added 30 per cent. to the census of 1861. He objected
to'the bill now before the house, but begged to assure the
house that neither ho nor his party was averse to
a change in the representative system ; they were desirous
of a reform, but wanted such a reform as would be per-
manent.
Lord F. CAVENDISH defended the Government mea-
sure, supported the right of the working man to be repre-
sented, and trusted that, now a useful measure of reform
was before the house, her Majesty's advisers would not
put it off to a more convenient season.
Mr. DU CANE was dissatisfied with the proposed re-
distribution of seats, and introduced Maldon, Harwich, and
North Essex as instances of injustice. He taunted the
Government with their lessened power, and predicted the
overthrow of the contemplated Reform Bill.
sition of ing
democratic and revolutionary,lv
had being
ithe CANDLISH pointed to the moderate measures
brought forward
nt
the t6ppe Instead
did sufficient justice to the workingg
man. Although the by the Gov e
a rns
Bested, it scarce
borough constituencies had increased
since 1832 67 per cent.,
d the county constituencies only
31 per cent., yet they
were going to add to the numbers
of the county members,
but not to the borough members.
re called upon to go into an
Mr. LOWE said they we
com-
mittee on a bill which had never been read a second time.
The two halves of it had been read a second time, each
of them; but the whole measure they had only then
before them. The first half the house was induced—or
should he say coerced—into
passingwithout any know-
ledge of the second part. The second
half had been hur-
ried on to a second reading so fast—only an interval of a
week being given to master most plicate
that he for one had been unable to take any part in the
second reading of the Seats Bill for want of time to make
up his mind. He hoped the house, therefore, would
allow
com d details
that
him tonuestion, even at that stage, the principle of the
meattsure on which they were called upon to go into com-
miee. (Hear, hear.) He must apologise to the house for
the monotonous nature of his complaints, which were jus-
tified by the uniform nature of the provocation which he
received. (Laughter.) That provocation was that the
Government kept continually bringing in measures to
modify the institutions of the country without telling the
house the principle on which those measures were based.
Ho had made the same complaint to the Chancellor of the