The Sun.
London, England, 1859-03-21 00:00:00

INDICTABLE OFFENCES BILL.

This bill passed through committee without amendments'
and was ordered to be reported on Thursday next.
Lord LYNDHURST thought that the bill ought not
to be forwarded so hastily.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said he had no objection
to postpone the third reading of the bill until his noble
friend the Lord Chief Justice was in his place,
although he knew his noble friend entirely approved
of all its provisions. He did not see any objection to the
bill being reported on Thursday, and he would not move
the third reading until Lord Campbell was present.

MUTINY BILL.
This bill was read a second time.
MARINE MUTINY BILL.
This bill was also read a second time.
COUNTY COURTS BILL.
This bill was read a second time.

CONVICT PRISONS ABROAD BILL.
This bill passed through committee.
MANOR COURTS (IRELAND) BILL.
This bill was reported with amendments.
Their lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS—(THIS EVENING).
The SrEAKER took the chair at four o'clock.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.
The following bills were read a third time, and passed :
East Suffolk Railway; Lands Improvement Company; and
Weymouth and Melcombe Regis Markets and Pier.
The following private bills were considered and ordered
for third reading :—Glasgow Corporation Water ; King's
Lynn Borough and l'ort and Harbour Improvement ;
Llanidloes and Newtown Railway; Londonderry Bridge;
and the Chichester Harbour Embankment.
PETITIONS.
Several petitions were presented against the Government
Reform Bill ; in favour of vote by ballot.; and for the
recall of Sir John Bowring, &c.

NEW MEMBER.
Captain JERVIS took the oaths and his seat for Harwich.

TIIE DIVORCE COURT.
Mr. EDWIN JAMES gave notice that he would put a
question to Government o.i the subject of the increase of
business in this court, with a view to its facilitation.
DESPATCHES TO LORD CANNING.
Mr. SALISBURY asked the Secretary of State for
India, whether the despatch, No. 5, 1858, dated the
9th December, had been submitted to the Indian Council
for consideration before its transmission to Lord Canning ;
also, if any reply had been received from Lord Canning to
the despatch in question ; and whether the Government
were prepared to lay such reply on the table of the house ?
Lord STANLEY said he was not in a position to lay on
the table of the house the document referred to.
CONSOLIDATED FUND (i 1,222,388 Bs. 9d.) BILL.
This bill was read a third time and passed.
CONSOLIDATED FUND (L 11,000,000) BILL.
This bill was also read a third time and passed.

PARLIAMENTARY REFORM.
The 'Strangers' Gallery was filled immediately prayers
were ON or, and the stream of petitions that flowed inces-
santly against the Government measure, and the applause
with which they were received evinced, in the clearest
manner, the feeling of the house and the country. Mr.
• BERKELEY was ent.usted with a number of these petitions,
and excited considerable amusement by shouldering the
voluminous documents, and bending under their weight,
depositing them on the usual receptacle. Mr. GARNETT
presented a petition from the inhabitants of Hamersham,
praying for the adoption of the Government Bill ; and this
solitary demonstration in favour of the obnoxious measure
elicited considerable laughter.

THE REFORM BILL.
On the order of the day for the second reading
of this bill,
Lord J. RUSSELL moved as an "amendment—
" That this house is of opinion, that it is neither just nor
politic to interfere, in the manner proposed in this
bill, with the freehold franchise as hitherto exercised
in the counties in England and Wales ; and
that no re-adjustment of the franchise will
satisfy this house that does not provide for a greater
extension of the suffrage in cities and boroughs than is
contemplated in. the present measure."
He strongly objected to the disfranchisement of the
county voters, as proposed by the bill, -which he
considered as a. gross injustice to the parties who
inherited that privilege. He thought it would be
doing a great injury to counties to carry out that

R. d.
4 0
4 4
4 10
4 10
4 4

1859.

proposition; and he believed the effect of the Go-
vernment bill would be to flood small boroughs in

counties with voters, and to revive many of the
evils that existed' prior to the passing of the
Reform Bill of 1832. (Hear, hear.) He would
illustrate his view by referring to the case of the
borough of Liskeard, where, if this bill were to
come into operation, the landowners might, swamp
the local constituency, and virtually alter
the representation. The bill did not extend
the suffrap—it merely changed it ; and in
doing so it c ommitted an act of violence that would
not prove very popular to those who were affected
by it. He con fessed that he loved the old system
which preserved the difference between counties
and borough s. (Hear, hear.) He referred to
the opinion .zxpressed by Lord Derby on this
question, which was in strict conformity with
what he (Lo rd J. Russell) had just enunciated.
How was it, then, that Lord Derby could intro-
duce a mew iure so much at variance with the
principles 1' Le had formerly professed ? In this
bill there was no change introduced which
was requir ed or demanded by the people
at large. The Government proposed to de-
stroy what was ancient, without making any pro-
vision for what was new. (Hear, hear.) Since
the passinE ; of the Reform Bill of 1832 there had
been a gre tt advance and progress in the intel-
lectual con did= of the masses, but, notwithstand-•
ing, he was opposed to what was called universal
suffrage, or manhood suffrage. At the same time
he consith reit that it would be unfair to limit the
franchise me rely to the £lO voter. He defended
the course which he adopted on the pre-
sent occasion, inster.d of moving that the
bill should be reat.t a second time that day
six months, becaus a it contained some provisions
of which he approved, and he would be open to
the charge )f inrmsistency if he opposed the bill
in its entire
Y, though he must denounce the mea-
sure as mos t T Injust, injurious, and noxious. They
had been tth
y eatened with a dissolution of Parliament,
if the
.111-r!ared this bill any opposition, but consi-
posterity, he
dering e lat they were legislating for