The Sun.
London, England, 1866-04-20 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, APRIL 20, 1866.

it be in 1876 ? That was the point upon which he wanted
information, but the right hon. gentleman would not

give it. Indeed, he had been laughed at when he asked

what the effect of the bill would be in the future.

He hoped it would not be supposed that in voting against
this bill he was the enemy of the working classes. He only

voted against it because he saw danger in giving a pre-

ponderance of power to any class. Justice to all, prepon-
derance to none, was his motto. His noble friend who
moved the amendment did so in a manner so straightfor-

ward and manly that it was not necessary for those who
followed him to justify the course they were pursuing.
(Hear, hear.) His hon. friend the Under-Secretary for

. . .
Foreign Affairs told them the other night that he (Lord
Elcho) would not let him answer the speech of the noble
lord the member for King's Lynn (Lord Stanley).
Mr. LAYARD—I said, gentlemen opposite will not
allow me.

Lord ELCHO—He would remind the house that his
honourable friend began by saying, with the utmost self-
complacency—(Opposition cheers and laughter) - that he
intended to answer the argument of the noble lord.
_(op-

position ironical cheers.) However, he very soon left the
noble lord and took to Smith the plasterer—(great'laugh-
ter)—and the temptations to which he was exposed, pray-
ing that Smith might be delivered from these temptations.

Well, he was sure .there was scarce a single member pre-
sent listening to his hon. friend who did not earnestly pray
that he might be delivered from Smith the plasterer.
(Great laughter.) The truth was that valuable and useful

as were the services of his hon. friend in digging Assyrian

antiquities out of the mud—(cries of " Oh, oh," from the

Ministerial benches)—no one was more ready than he was
to do honour to his hon. friend for the signal services he
had rendered to the country in digging Assyrian antiquities

out of the mud—still, valuable as had been his services in
that respect, it must be owned he was not exactly the per-

son to pick this proposal of the Government out of the

mud. (Opposition cheers and laughter.) But, in default
of argument, the Government had resorted, first, to defa-
mation of their opponents—(loud cheers)—secondly, they

threatened them with the - fear of their constituents ;

thirdly, they cried out for fealty to party. (Hear, hear.:

The opponents of the bill were said to be actuated by in.

terested and sinister motives; and his right hon. friend
the member for Caine was especially charged. Now, he

might mention that about the time the bill of 1864 was in-
troduced, his right hon. friend and himself were in the habit
of walking home together from their respective offices. The
bill of 1854 proposed a £6 franchise, and upon that occasion
he remembered well his right hon. friend and himself both
made up their minds to leave office rather than vote for a
proposal which, in their belief, might give a preponderance
to one class Of the community. (Cheers.) The year before
the present his met his right hon. friend in the lobby on the
Franchise Bil 4 division, and when he called upon him to
fight that bill, his right hon. friend replied at once, " Al-
though it was -Contrary to his interests as a party man to do
so, yet he felt so strongly upon the question of a £6 fran-
chise that he would do his best to throw the bill out."

(Cheeri.) The only thing against his right hon. friend was
that he had voted against the proposal of tfie Derby Go-
vernment. (Ironical cheers.) But his right hon. friend
frankly owned that upon that occasion he acted with his
party. (Loud ironical cheers on the Ministerial benches.)
Well, let those who found fault with his right hon. friend
for acting with his party on this occasion throw the first

stone. (Opposition cheers.) Let it not be forgotten that
although the Chancellor of the Exchequer opposed the pro-
posal of Lord Derby, he was himself now bringing forward
one of very much the same character. (Cries of "No, no,"

rorn the Ministerial benches, with Opposition cheers.

Therefore, on the score of consistency, the two right hon,

gentlemen might pair off. But then some of them on that
side of the house were described as Adullamites because

they were discontented. Well, he might say they were dis-
contented, and they were discontented because they dreaded
the tyranny of the Saul on the Treasury bench, backed by
bis armour-bearer behind him. (Laughter and Opposition

cheers.) That was the improper motive which had driven
them into that Cave of Adullam, where they were a happy
family, daily, nay, hourly increasiag in numbers, and
where they would remain until they went forth to de-
liver Israel from tyranny and oppression. (Renewed
cheers.) Rut the Treasury screw had been also brought
to bear, and recalcitrant members were threatened with
the fear of their constituents. That had been applied, in

some cases, with great severity ; and he must say he did
not know a more pitiable spectacle than that preseuted by
the right hon. member for Gateshead (Sir W. Hutt)—
(great laughter and cheers on the Opposition benches)—
who, haying been submitted to this torturing process, now

lay upon the floor of the house a crumpled mass of
withered lags and dislocated joints. (Prolonged laughter.)
Valuing as he did the privilege of a seat in that house, he
would ask where was the honour confeired thereby if

those two letters which were appended to their names be-
came only symbols of moral degradation ? (Cheers.)
Well, then, in respect of the fear of their constituents, it
was evident their choice lay between a cave and a hut -
(great laughter)-between Adullam and Gateshead. (Re-
newed laughter.) Ho could not doubt the alternative
which all independent men would adopt if this screw were
turned on. (Cheers.) At the same time, if he were
pledged up to the eyes on the question of Reform, be
should have no fear of his constituents in giving his vote
upon the amendment. (Hear, hear.) That amendment
was a protest against the rash and fragmentary manner in
'which the Government proposed to deal with the queStion
of Reform ; but it was something more : it was also a pro-
test against the Government asking for confidence from
followers in whom they showed no confidence. (Hear,
hear.) Then with respect to tho cry of "fealty to party."
His right bon. friend told the country that he brought
forward his proposals in a fragmentary manner, because
he knew the people he had to deal with. (Ironical cries
of "Hear, hear.") It seemed to him his right hon. friend
had made a great mistake. The' very way he brought
in that bill, and the language of the press, showed
very clearly that he did not know the people
he bad to deal with. Indeed, some on that
side of the house felt that so strongly that at any
risk they felt called upon to vote for the amendment-
(eheers)-and let not his right hon. friend think that they
were a mere fraction of the party. On the contrary, he
fearlessly asserted that if the majority of the members on
that side of the house only spoke as they felt they would
speak as he had done. (Opposition cheers.) And though
they might follow the right hon. gentleman into the lobby,
there would be a grudging, a hesitating, and a sulky alle-
giance ; while he might rest assured they would not forget
what he had done. (Renewed cheers.) He protested
against the attempt to coerce them. (Cheers.) In con-
cluding, he wished to say a few words with reference to
the position of the Moderate Liberals upon this question.
Last year he had ventured to point out that he believed
the time must come when the moderate men on the Liberal
side of the house could no longer act cordially with the
extreme section of the Liberal party. There was a small
section of most honest and sincere and able men, who
honestly held extreme opinions, which they took every
opportunity of pressing upon the house and the country.
They heard a talk of conspiracies; but the greatest rebel
he knew-the greatest conspirator since the days of Ceti-
line-was the hon. member for Brighton (Mr. White).
What was the policy of this extreme section, so far as
could be gathered from their speeches ? It was this. To
establish in this country so powerful a House of Commons
-a house so democratic in its nature that ho believed the
balance of the constitution would be upset. As regarded
questions of property, the policy of this party was the
abolition of .the law of primogeniture-(hear, hear, from
the Oppositip,n)-and the breaking-up and division of large
estates. (Ms. Bright-No, no.) He could not, of course,
quote exact passage, but a pamphlet had lately been
printed by the hon. member for Birmingham containing an
authorised revision of his speeches. These, however, it
would seem the hon. member did not like when he saw
them altogether, so he bought them up. (Loud laughter.)
Mr. BRIGHT-I may, perhaps, sir, be allowed to say
that there is not a word of truth in what the hon. member
has said. (Renewed laughter.)
Lord ELCHO was glad the hon. member had given this
the most direct contradiction. All he (Lord Elcho) knew,
however, was that he had tried to get a copy-(Mr. Bright
-So have I) - but have not been able to do so. However, if
the speeches were so popular, and were so eagerly bought
up, there was great necessity that such dangerous opinions
should be met. To continue what he was on the point of
saying when he was interrupted. The policy of the ex-
treme Liberal section as regarded the Church was a com-
plete severance of Church and State--(Hear, hear, from
Opposition)-and as respected taxation they desired to put
it all upon realised property, and relieve all other descrip-
tions. Now, if that was the programme of this extreme
section, he should like to know whether it was also the
programme of the large majority of the Liberal party. Ile
believed the policy of the Government tended in this direc-
tion. (Cheers from the Opposition.) His noble friend
(Earl Grosvenor) had raised a standard in order to rally
those who felt that this was not a policy which would con-
duce to the permanent prosperity' of this country, but that
it was rather subversive of the present stateof things. He
had raised his standard, and by so doing he had laid himself
open to much obloquy and abuse. Should he succeed, as
he (Lord Elcho) conscientiously believed he would do, in
carrying his amendment-(loud cheers from the Opposi-
tion) -he was certain of this, that a very short time would
elapse after his success before those very men who were
giving a faltering support to the Government would thank
him for what ho had done. (Oh, oh, and cheers.) He had
been the means of saving what was necessary and desirable
in that house-the existence of the Moderate Liberals. He
would, therefore, make an appeal to those gentlemen on the
opposite side - he would paraphrase words which he had
heard in that house-he would appeal to them not to sup-
port a policy which tended to Americanise our institutions
- (cries of Oh, oh)-and to change our kingly common-
wealth with all its liberties into a democratic tyranny-
(loud cheers from the Oppositiou)-he would appeal to them
not by their hands-for by their hands alone could it be
done- to help to unmoor the constitution of these lands
from its strong fastenings in the past, from its safe ancho-
rage in the present, and let it drift at least two thousand
miles towards the west. (Opposition cheers.)
Sir W. HUTT replied to various criticisms and unjust
misrepresentations to which he had been exposed. He ac-
cused Emil Melee of having given way to the cry of fana-
tical partisanship. 110 maintained that the position he had

occupied in reference to the amendment which he had put
on the paper and withdrawn subsequently was not in any
way hostile. The measure was, in his opinion, a salutary
_ _

and Conservative one, and as such he should give it his
cordial support.

Mr. B. HOPE felt much opposed to the modern system
of petting and patronising working men, and patting them
on the back ; and he felt sure that they themselves equally
disliked it. The Government had not been exempt from
this cardinal fault. They had treated the working man

something after the fashion of a converted African chief at
a pious tea party. The proper course would have been to
have introduced a measme to give the suffrage to the elite

of the artisan body, instead of the present measure, which
was a blundering, mechanical, hasty, and tinkering at-

6rapt at legislation.
Mr. T. HUGHES rose to give his hearty support to the

Government on the Franchise Bill, and, before proceeding

to explain his reasons for giving them that support, he was
sure ha should not say an unpleasant thing to the house
when he stated that it was not his intention to quote the

opinions of any hen. member and to show that they bad
changed. (Hear, hear.) He thought that in the present
times, when the faith of men, whether religious, political,
or social, was being winnowed in a manner which was evi-
dence of a very remarkable crisis, it was often not a proof

of strength, but of weakness, for a man to hold on to the
same opinions, or, as they might be called, prejudices. It
was desirable that a man in early life should have fixed

principles and should adhere to them, but a strong man
knew that he needed not to care about preserving one opi-

nion, because he was aware that he had a principle in his
mind to go to from which he could derive another opinion;
but the weak man, if he lost one set of opinions, did not

know, having no principle in his mind, where to go for
another set. Ile gave his support to the bill exactly for the
reason on account of which the noble lord thesmember for

---
Haddingtonshire opposed it. The noble lord opposed the
bill because it was merely a Franchise Bill, and the right
hon. member for Warwickshire asked what was the mean-

ing of the Government in bringing in that measure. He
apprehended the meaning of it was precisely this—that
the advanced or extreme Liberal party, as it was called,
of whom he was a humble member, had at last found a
Government who said, " The really important question,
the one important question for tho country at the present
time, is Reform—and the important part of that question,
the part without which all the other parts have no mean-
ing for us at this moment, is the question of the suffrage."
(Hear, hear.) That was exaetly the reason why he ten-
dered his humble support to the Government on that oc-
casion. The Liberals should be glad at having at length
discovered a Government determined to look the ques-
tion of Reform in the face, and with the wisdom to see
what was the vital portion of Reform at the presen
time.

He had been inclined to think that even a

lower borough franchise than that now proposed would

have been better, and that the Liberal members might
perhaps be wise in still agitating for and endeavouring to
obtain a yet lower borough franchise. An evening or two

after the introduction of that measure he met an influen

tial man among the trades' union men and the artisans of
London—an inhabitant of his borough, but not a voter

and on asking him what he thought of the Government
bill, the man replied, " Well, sir, it will bring in a good bit
_ _

of the best of us." Nothing stronger than that could be
said in favour of the measure. It would bring in " a good
bit of the best" of the artisans and mechanics of that city
and the northern cities; and on that very ground it ought
to be looked upon with favour by hon. gentlemen opposite
if they really desired a moderate measure. Why, even in
the estimates of hon. gentlemen opposite the utmost number

whom it would enfranchise could net exceed some2oo,ooo
of the best mechanics and artisans of the kingdom. It really
seemed to him to be extremely insincere talk to say, as the
hon. member for Stoke had done, that such a limited mea-
sure as that would open the floodgates to democracy, or
indeed open them to anything except a great improvement
in our representative system. (Hear.) When he heard, he

would not say the howls, but the noise with which certain
sentiments that he could not deem revolutionary were re-
ceived on the other side of the house, he confessed that he
had asked himself whether he was one of those who desired
to upset that British Constitution which had lasted 700
years according to some gentlemen, 600 years according to

others, and only since 1832 according to one hon. member
on the Ministerial side. (Hear, and a laugh.) Did he, because
he warmly supported that bill, wish to marry two wives, or
to partition the property of the noble mover and seconder
of the amendment? (Hear, hear, and a laugh.) The noble
lord the member for Haddingtonshire was perpetually say-
ing that he conscientiously did this and conscientiously did
that. Well, he could conscientiously say for himself that
his-earnest desire was to preserve that common England of
theirs, in which the rich man had no greater stake than the
poor man, and to hand it down to their children as good a
country as they had themselves found it. (Hear, hear.)
That bill, if passed, would have a considerable effect in'
bringing about that result. The resistance to the measure
came fom gentlemen the uprightness of whoso intentions
he had no reason to doubt ; but when they spoke of opposing
that " political cataract," he could not help feeling that
they were just the persons on whom that cataract would not
fall. Those who would have to meet the first burst of its fury,
when the floodgetca vi democracy v. rro opened, were men
like the hon. baronet the member for the West Riding (Sir
F. Crossley) and his hon. friend the member for Bradford
(Mr. Forster), than whom no better friends of the artisans
and mechanics of this country, and no men who knew them
better or were more trusted by them, though they were both
masters, existed in England. Surely, therefore, hon. gen-
tlemen opposite might think twice before they indulged such
idle fears, when they saw i wo such men, who ought to dread
these mischiefs if they had any reality in them, coming for-
ward, not only to support that bill, but to say they would
hail with pleasure a considerably larger measure of .Reform
in the same direction. (Rear, hear.) The hon. member for
Northumberland had contended that the mechanic and arti-
san class were already well represented in that house, but
the hon. gentleman would never have made that assertion if
he had been as immediatelyacquainted with that class as he
and many other members were. He entirely agreed with the
statement of his hon. friend the Under-Secretary for Foreign
Affairs, that neither his hon. friend, nor himself, nor any other
member of that house could really and efficiently represent
the working men of our great towns. No man could ever do
so except one who had lived and was living with them,
who was sharing their ideas and also their privations. If
the house would allow so young a member as himself to cri-
ticise it in one point, he would say its fault, as far as re-
presenting any class of the community went, was its exces-
sive solvency. (A laugh.) The House of Commons was
sometimes spoken of as a body whose members owned he
knew not how many thousands a year each. Whether that
was the fact or not he could not tell ; but it was impossible
that those who lived in the affluence and luxury which
the majority of that house enjoyed could really represent
that great class in the country who had no accumulated
property except a fund which belonged not only to them
but to all their fellow subscribers in common, such as the
funds of the trades-unions and the friendly societies, or
some other joint funds, and who, unless they had some
share in such a fund, had nothing beyond- the small quan-
tity of furniture in their humble dwellings which they
could really call their own, and had to rely ex clusivelyupOn
the labour of their hands from day to day for the support
of themselves and their families. That, to anybody at all
familiar with those classes, made a chasm which was utterly
impassible to bridge over, however much they might wish
to do it. The condition of their lives, the way-in which
they endeavoured to meet those conditions, and also the
principles of their lives, were all entirely different from
of hon. gentleman in that house. Let him for a mo-
ment say the plain truth on these subjects. Those who
took an interest in social and political subjects had im-
bibed what were called sound notions of political economy.
They had read the regular text-books ; they -had a certain
number of faiths which they held to almost religiously.
They believed entirely and absolutely in the law of supply
and demand as a law of nature which nothing could really
and permanently interfere with. They believed that to
buy cheap and sell dear was the rule by which all trade
must be conduetea ; and they believed that the commodity
'of labour was just as much an object of barter as a bale of
cotton or a bar of iron. They had also 'read "Darwin," and
books of that kind. They knew that the big' fish must
always eat the little one, and that small persons must dis-
appear before the larger. These beliefs were almost all ac-
cepted by the persons who sent representatives to that house,
but the beliefs of those men whose admission to that house
was now questioned were far less sound. They would, be
called by the noble lord the member for Stamford senti-
mental rant, and he was afraid many of them would throw
a shade of sadness on the !ace of the hon. member for
Westminster, because those beliefs were, first and foremost,
that such a thing was attainable as a fair price for labour.
They did not believe in what was called the " higgling" of
the market. They believed that labour—the work of living
men—could not be subject tc the same laws as a mere bale
of goods or a bar of iron. They believed, further, that it
was the duty of the strong man in their trades to support
the weak to a great extent, end that was the foundation of
the unions of which he world speak presently. They be-
lieved, again, in the organisation of labour. These faiths
might frighten some hon. members, but they were not
visionary. He was not say,ng they were right or wrong,
but they were held by far the largest portion of society.
And were they to say they -mould not admit them there and
let their ideas come into fair collision with their own ?
Would it not much more colduco to the good of the coun-
try and make them wiser unn, if they could have their re-
presentatives—men who redly and heartily accepted those
beliefs—to state them to Out house ? Twenty years ago
these ideas would have been called chimeras; but what had
these men done within the last few years ? First as to the
organisation of labour : wiat was the state of the trades'
unions ? Up to this very iihe these trades' unions woreac-
tually outside the law. They could not be fully registered
as friendly societies, and therefore were not assisted as
other combinations were by the law of the country. Yet, in
the face of this fact, what litd they done ? He would men-
tion one with which he hadbeen familiar for many years—
which had become one of tie most extraordinary organisa-
tions that had over been bought together by men in their
position in the world. Tht Amalgamated Society of Engi-
neers consisted of 32,000 hembers— all skilled mechanics.
It had a reserve fund of £/,5,000, £30,000 of which was in-
vested in Post-office savings banks. It paid £l,OOO a week
in its different benefits, It had branches not only in every

great town in England, but also in our colonies and in the
United States. Now, when they considered that this orga-
nisation had been worked out by men not only unenfran-

chisel, but many of them illiterate, under every difficulty
_ _

with which man could have to contend, he asked could such

an organisation have been carried out by men of any other
class in the country more successfully or brought to a more
brilliant conclusion? Again, the Amalgamated Society of
Carpenters and Joiners, which had only been founded a
few years, had already 150 branches, and during last year
spent £ll,OOO or £12,000 in benefits to its members. That
was the society which had frightened exceedingly the
leading journal in this country. It was said they wanted
nine hours' wages for eight hours' work, and they wanted
many other nefarious projects of that kind. But, looking
at the average of their earnings, who did not feel that it
was not unnatural they should have made such efforts to
obtain a small advance on their wages? The average
weekly earnings of the men belonging to the building
trades in London were from 275. to 28s. a week, and when
it was considered that within a few years they had doubled
and trebled the property of this great town—when it was
considered they had doubled the property of the noble lord
who moved the present amendment, he thought they need
not grudge them their success in having been able to ob-
tain some little advance, perhaps Is. 6d. a week, in consi-
deration of what they bad done and the intelligence they
had shown. The building trades were a highly paid class
of workmen, yet their wages throughout the country did
not reach 275. a week. They were told by those who op-
posed the Government bill that these men could, with ave-
rage prudence, gain for themselves the suffrage under the
present £lO qualification. Supposing a workman had em-
ployment for 48 or 49 weeks in the year (for allowance
must be made for sickness, travelling to find work, and
other things), taking his average earnings at 275. a week,
to come in under the present franchise he would be spend-
ing an amount on his house which, proportionately, they
themselves would not be justified in spending on house rent.
Unless, therefore, Parliament lowered the present suffrage,
they were calling on the greater portion of the mechanics
to spend more on their mere housing than they had a right,
as honest men and with a due regard to the claims of their
wives and families, to expend. (Hear.) The mechanics and
artisans of England had endeavoured to work out their
principles—wbether true or false—first by trades unions,
and secondly, by their different co-operative societies. The
amount of intelligence and self-sacrifice which they had
brought to the solution of the problem of co-operative so-
cieties was sufficient to put to shame all other classes of
society. These societies were constituted and carried out
upon sounder principles than trade was now usually con-
ducted in this country. They absolutely prohibited credit;
they restored the system of ready money, and they gave a
healthy tone to trade, which it had too much lost of late
years. These societieshadat all events proved theesincerity
and the honest belief of those who promoted them. They
had proved that the working men were ready to make sa-
crifices for their principles, and that the strong were ready
to come to the help of the weak. The best men among
them had said that they would not leave their class but

lift it, and this was the remarkable feature of their organi-
sation. Many hon. members had read books like that writ-
ten by Mr. Smiles, entitled "Self-Help," in which self-
made men were held up to reverence and respect. Many of
these were artisans who had risen to wealth and eminence
from the humblest walks of life. They were deserving of
all possible credit, but they were not representative men of
their class. The really representative men of that class
were animated by quite other ideas. Their principle was to
refuse to come out of their class, and to stay and live in it
with the view, so far asthey could, of lifting the whole bulk
of their brethren. (Hear.) The more hon. members exa-
mined what was going on throughout the country, the
more reason they would have to wonder at the extraordi-
nary suceess that had attended their efforts. And now,
having touched upon the methods by which the working
classes had sought to carry out their views and ideas, and
the success that had attended their efforts,the house would,
he hoped, permit him to inquire what it had done for the
working men while they had been workingout their salva-
tion in the different ways he had described. (Hear, hear.)
He had heard it said since he had been a member of that
house that the working classes had.no grievances of which
to complain. It seemed to him, on the contrary, that they
had many grievances of which they had good right to com-
plain. (Hear, hear.) While they were labouring for them-
selves, and working out their great ideas, how had the Le-
gislature housed, fed, and educated thorn ? The house had
done nothing to improve the houses of working men, and
the artisans of this great town were at the present time worse
housed than at any period within his memory. (Hear.)
Great public bodies and companies came to thathouse with
projects to pull down their houses, and no stress was put
upon those bodies to restore them. Then came the question
of food. (An Hon. Member—" Question.") It was the ques-
tion, and he would assert that the adulteration of the food
of the labouring classes had been a great grievance with
them. (Hear.) Then with regard to education, the people
of this country were the worst educated of any free people
on the face of the earth. As it was a test question upon this
bill whether they would admit the working man to a share
in the making of laws, did the house suppose that if they
had had any direct action upon the making of those laws or
any means of making their opinions felt, these questions
would he,vo remained in their present condition? Then there
was the question of arbitration courts, as connected with
the labour question, which had been bandied backwards
and forwards, sometimes in one house and sometimes in
another. Nothing, however, had been done, and the ques-
tion remained just as it was 20 years ago, although the
opinion of the mechanics and artisans had come round to de-
sire these courts and to believe in them. (Hear.) He very
much feared that, notwithstanding the Bill of Lord St.
Leonards, this question was likely to remain unsettled.
Then, again, there was the question of the Master and
Workmen's Acts. (Hear, hear.) If, in a case of contract
between master and man, the workman was charged with
breaking the agreement, the first step was personal, andthe
workman was put in prison, while if the master broke his
part of the contract the first process against the master was
to make him pay a fine. The working men believed that
this state of things was very unjust—(hear, hear)—and that
if they were properly represented the employers and em-
ployed would be put upon a more equitable footing. (Hear,
hear.) Then came the question of the workhouse in-
firmaries. Would the members of the house be content
with them in their present state—a crying disgrace to the
metropolis—if their own flesh and blood had any chance
of going to them ? (Hear, hear.) Then came the question
of dangerous and unwholesome trades. Twenty years ago
a terrible disease called necrosis of the jaws was discovered
in Vienna, which had since spread to this country, and
was found chiefly among the makers of lucifer Matches,
that has now grown to be a very large trade, and not less
than 1,800 children were employed in the manufacture.
Necrosis of the jaws was one of the most awful diseases
that ever afflicted humanity, and there were not one or two
but a dozen other trades in which the condition of the
labourer was such as would not be suffered in any civilised
country. Would any one who looked at the subject fairly
and dispassionately say that if the class upon whom these
evils pressed—who worked in these workshops and lived
in these houses—had been fairly represented, their condi-
tion would not have been improved? (Hear.) As an instance
of the want of sympathy on the part of the house with the
working classes he would instance the existing laws regu-
lating the sale of alcoholic drinks, for though a very large
majority of the working classes complained of them as
throwing temptations to insobriety in their way, the only
answer they got from Parliament was that they ought to
have resolution enough to resist those tempthlions. The
gallant member for Huntingdon had expressed distrust of
the leaders of the working-classes, meaning, probably, the
managers of the trades' unions,who were usually denounced
by the newspapers as noisy demagogues; but he could testify
from long acquaintance with them that no men were more
anxious to prevent strikes and to further the best interests
of their class and of the public generally. The amalga-
mated engineers, indeed, had not had a strike for 15 years,
and for 12 or 14 had never claimed an advance in wages,
the yOunger and more impulsive members being held back
by their leaders. Again, it was feared that the working
men would combine on political questions, and thus se-
cure an ascendancy ; but, to remove any such apprehen-
sion, he might inform the House that one section of the
London trade unions were strongly opposed to strikes,
that the other section were less averse to them, and that
both regarded the co-operative societies with some jea.
lousy. These highly-paid artisans, who could chiefly
get the suffrage by this Bill, were thus divided into three
parties as distinct as political parties in that house. (Hear.)
He desired the extension of the franchise, however, more
for the sake of the country generally than for working
men theniselves, for we had allowed a new world, as it
were, to grow up without any contact with the rest of so-
ciety, and he agreed with the hon. member for Brighton
(Mr. Fawcett) that there was great danger of our losing
more skilled artisans by emigration than we could well
spare, and that unless they were admitted into full citizen-
ship their attachment to their native land would be weak-
ened, and their readiness to leave it as labour became mere
valuable elsewhere would increase, until we lost the best
of our artisans, who contributed so largely to the wealth
and prosperity of the country. (Hear.) He believed such
a loss would be most disastrous,•and that the only way to
stop it would be to treat the working classes fairly, and
introduce -to the franchise such a portion of them as they
fairly could. No one would say that a poor 200,000, scat-
tered over the whole country, would be too largo a number
to admit, or would bo likely- to swamp the present con-
stituencies. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. DOULTON said that if he were asked blindly
to support the Government before they put on the
table the bill for the redistribution of seats, he should like
to know what they had done to inspire him with confi-
dence. Certainly, only within the last few weeks, their
conduct on the Tests Abolition Bill and the question of
church rates did not have that effect. He did not, how-
ever, enter the house as the slavish adherent of the pre-
sent Ministry, but as an independent member ; and he only
valued that position so long as its duties be performed
with a due regard to his own self-respect and honour. If
the Government would lay on the table the Redistribution
Bill, and it dealt with the question fairly, no one more
than himself would more warmly support the Cabinet;
but as he believed that few greater calamities could befal
this country than the passing of a mere franchise bill, he
could not bring his conscience to support a measure which

would increase every existing anomaly and augment every
existing evil.
Mr. M. GIBSON stated that he was surprised that after
having voted for the franchise bill of Mr. Baines, the
hon. member for Lambeth,who had just addressed the house,
should have ranged himself in the ranks of the opponents
of this measure. If any measure were entitled to com-
mand the support of the great Liberal party, it was a mo-
derate extension of the franchise such as that contained in
the, present bill, accompanied by the repeal of the ratepay-
ing clauses in the old Reform Act. All they were asked
to do by the second reading was to sanction the principle
of the measure. They would then be as free as ever they
were in committee to amend it. Let them decide first
who the electors were to be, and then what number of
members particular places should return to Parliament.
The question they were called on to vote was broadly,
should there or should there not bo any reduction of the
franchise ? If the House of Commons decided in the ne-
gative it would not be the fault of the Government, and
the people out of doors would at once say that Parlia-
ment desired no reform at all. The country were tired
of mere theoretical statements in favour of Reform, and
would mark closely the men who made plenty of liberal
professions to their constituents, and now that the timo
came for action drow back and attempted to get rid of the
question in this indirect and unsatisfactory manner. In
conclusion, Mr. Gibson said that the present measure,
which was founded on the spirit of the times, was des-
tined to become law, and that its provisions, in the words
of the Royal Speech, would strengthen our free institu-
tions and conduce to the general welfare of the nation.
Mr. G. HARDY remarked that Mr. Gibson must be a
man of a very sanguine temperament to venture a confi-
dent prophecy that the measure would pass the second
reading. He condemned the present proposition as one
offering to the House the miserable fraction of a bill, and
stated that he should give it his most strenuous opposi-
tion. He maintained that this topic should be dealt with,
if at all, in a statesmanlike manner. The hon. gentle-
man then proceeded at great length to analyse the statis-
tics on wbich the case of the Government rested, and
stated finally that he considered the resolution gave a
tangible subject on which to vote. He objected to the
measure because it would override the counties by an
urban population ; because he did not know what was to
come afterwards; and because he did not understand who
those leaseholders were in the counties, except that they
were to be brought into the boroughs to vote. In the
boroughs, too, the tendency would be to re-establish the
corrupt constituencies which were now going away. Be-
lieving, therefore, that they had not before them the
means of settling this question, it was due to their own
honour and that of Parliament not to accept this partial,
this dangerous, and this most insidious bill.
The further debate was then postponed till to-morrow
(this day).
The orders of the day were disposed of, and the House
adjourned.

SPIRIT OF TILE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

--

TIMES.—" it is not very easy to make a good
speech on the Government side." This plaintive
confession of a Liberal member probably explains

the comparatively inferior quality which has hitherto
marked the speeches on the side of the Administra-
tion. The debate, which enters on its fifth night
this evening, has on the whole reflected the highest
credit on the new Parliament. Yet it will, we be-
lieve, be confessed by all that there has heen through-
out a marked distinction in the spirit, the energy,
and the.ability of the attack and the defence. The
course of the discussion yesterday was faithful to
the law observed on former nights. Mr. Graham
distinguished himself so highly in seconding the
Address at the commencement of the Session that

his speech on the Reform question was looked for-
ward to with some interest ; but it can scarcely be
considered equal to his first effort. Lord Elcho
properly reminded the house that the true question
before it was whether it should start on a career Of

legislation without knowing the whole of the course
to be taken and the goal to be reached, and by a
felicitous quotation from some election statistics
showed that the precipitation of the Government
in issuing their scheme of Reform in parts was not
required by any pledges of the Liberal party. Out
of 367 members taking rank on the Liberal side,
160 had expressed themselves in favour of Reform
on the hustings, while the rest were either silent,
or contented themselves with declaring an intention
to support Lord Palmerston. A vigorous onslaught
at the close of his speech on those who had been
coerced by their constituents into a promise to sup-
port the Government called up Sir William Hutt,
but as Lord Elcho finished about the time of the
dinner hour, the new Knight of the Bath had to de-
fend his constituency before a beggarly array of empty
benches. Among the arguments in defence of the
Franchise Bill hitherto advanced there has been none

more extraordinary, and certainly none more un-
fortunate, even that of Mr. Hughes. It was thought
_ _

that the advocacy of Mr. Layard had been some-
what damaging, but in tho harm he can do his
friends the Under-Secretary must give way to the
member for Lambeth. Mr. Hughes stated,on the

authority of an influential artisan among his con-
stituents, that the Franchise Bill would place a
large number of the best workmen in Lambeth on
the register ; but he forgot that the reduction of the
Franchise would not be confined to Lambeth and
constituencies of a sinilar character. Mr. Doulton,
who followel his colleague, and developed an ability
hitherto unsuspected, reminded him that the Fran-
chise would be lowered in Totnes and Great Yar-

mouth as well as in Lambeth, and challenged any
Liberal to affirm that the reduction of the qualifica-
tion in such places would not work more harm than
the good that would be gained elsewhere. It is but
justice, however, to remember that Mr. Hughes had
other reasons for defending the Franchise Bill be-
sides the effect it would have on his own constitu-
ency, though whether they would be likely to con-
ciliate opponents may well be doubted. The working
men, he said, have a political economy of their own.
They do not believe in the laws of demand and sup-
ply ; they do not believe that the rate of wages must
vary according to the principles which regulate the
variation in the prices of commodities ; they do
believe that work of different worth should be paid
with different wages ; and, on the other itahnedy tue
do believe in an organisation of labour; as
shownhae
great powers of organisation themselvdes,
neers
n
;
by such societies as the Amalgamated
or five to
gi
and they outnumber other classes by
four t
one, according to Mr. Hughes,
to
as hem
we
in the House of Commons. Admitting,
frankly do, that it is desirable
operatives should be stated
und
olet, we
nt
m
a bill which, going
and
emaesrt demur
sorf
to accepting on that
on the mere rule of nu .
principle at all, w account
as far as it has any
classes which so outnumberthlleyreesntdofinEogigvlainngd
notthe
would
ehmutusotf,
embodying them
k that Mr. Hughes himself is an
ilocifAecxtPsroe;Pnagrliasumeehnvt.iewitsi merely the power
moreover,
expositor of the theories of the working men.
weeks since he gallantly attempted
latobtlie-esmrbenoxidYcoasrtfheewir notions on the duty of providing
houses for labourers evicted by Railway Companies
in a new series of Standing Orders, and if the
attempt failed it was from no fault of his. The Per-
missive Bill is, according to Mr. Hughes, another
measure looked upon with great favour by working
men, and we get some light as to his notions of re-
presentation when we find this classed among the
beliefs of operatives which are unrepresented. We
had thought it had been discussed more than once
in Parliament, and a vote taken upon it ; so that we
are driven to suppose that working men are, in Mr.
Hughes's opinion, not represented at all unless their
representatives are in a majority. We have no wish,
however, to make capital out of Mr. Hughes's un-
guarded defence of the Franchise Bill. We do not
believe that a £7 qualification in boroughs would so
change the nature of Parliament as to lea d to the
1
adoption of all or any of the heresies he described.
The change would be great—greater,
to have
, as Lord Eleho
pointed out, than Mr. Gladstone
seems
imagined—but we may hope that neither it nor the
time, changes which would follow upon it would precipi-
tate us into Socialism. It is however, to have
r
done with this benevolent toying with the organi-
zationma
of labour. Mr. Hughes y remember that
in 1848 the theories of which he speaks did get the
mastery in France, and that nothing but an iron
will saved the amiable enthusiasts who patronised
them from sharing the fate of their predecessors of
the Gironde 60 years before. But the whole argument
of Mr. Hughes was fairly open to the remark of his
colleague that it was not easy to discover its con-
nexion with the question before the house. We allow
to him—as we allowed to Mr. Mill—that it is de-
sirable to have working-class representatives in the
House of Coinmons, but the Franchise Bill is not a
means to such an end. What a Franchise Bill would
effect, were it passed, is very simple. Large con-
stituencies would be enormously increased, and
small constituencies would be increased in a less pro-
portion, but still in a sensible degree. The anomalies
of the distribution of representative power would be
aggravated, at the same time that the ratio of party
strength would be scarcely altered. The experience
of the boroughs where freemen exist shows us what
the effect of lowering the franchise would be on the
small boroughs.; and we should, therefore, have con-
stituencies which are unwieldy made more unwieldy,
constituencies which arc corrupt Made more corrupt,
party forces relatively the same, but party fights
embittered, and a long struggle initiated, the end
of which would depend upon chance, if not upon
violence. Mr. Doulton did good service last night
in directing•the attention of the house to the point
really before it, and though Mr. Milner Gibson
pointed out that his opinion on a mere reduction of
the borough franchise must have undergone some
change since the division on Mr. Baines's bill, we
can only rejoice over a conversion to sounder views.
Mr. Doulton gave unanswerable reasons for not ac-

• t . , r ;

cording to the Administration the trust demanded
by them, and pointed out that those who believed
most implicitly in the sincerity of the Ministry, and
had the greatest confidence in their ability to earl
out their designs, could not yet adopt the Franchise
Bill unless they believed that it would, taken b_AY
itself, be beneficial. The issue for which I,ol'
Grosvenor provides a substitute is whether the
to talk, quite
Franchise Bill—p
idleur et sinz le—is worthy of becom-
ing law. It is
as Mr. Milner
Gibson talked last night, of bills to be laid on
the table expressing the intentions of Ministers, to
be proceeded with " as soon as circumstances would
allow," and the gravity with which he repeated
Mr. Villiers' statement that it is natural to fig
upon electors before fixing upon constituencies
was wonderful. It is, perhaps, natural to buy
carpets and furniture before knowing the rooms t°
be furnished. What are we to think when language
such as this is thus repeated after its absurdity hal
been exposed? Mr. Milner Gibson probably hear
Lord Stanley's speech ; he certainly must have
heard of it, he can easily refer to the report, and we
venture to ask him what conclusion is to be drawn
from the fact that one Cabinet Minister after
another has since undertaken the defence of
Franchise Bill, and that he, the last of them, has
discreetly followed the example of his predecessors
in eschewing the task of noticing, much less °
meeting, the arguments to be found in it ?
HERALD.—The conduct of the two members for
Lambeth in the course of last night's debate, Pre"
sented a not unexpected contrast. The antecedents
for
of the author of " Tom Brown" are warrantY
his profound admiration of the working class ill
general and the trades' unions in particular ; andira
could not afford to peril Isis popularity by a ,ve";;
the
too honest for the comprehension of those Wn°s''
spokesman he has made himself. Mr. Poulton wail
independent enough to give that vote ; and We.
enough acquainted with the real temper and practfv;
cal disposition of the working class to wish to Itriet„.
how much power is to be given them, and hoW
property and capital are to be placed at the reel
of class legislation and class taxation at the han"
of those who have none, before indulging the pleabs;
ing sentiments of confidence and trust expressed, by
his colleague. No one whO knows Mr. lle—
Gibson could be surprised to.find that his chief eni
deavour was to cover his confused apprehension 0_
the ideas he has borrowed from Mr. Bright by tool;
rowing that gentleman's fervour of mannerifiaa
that the result was a melancholy failure. RiS 11"- cs
of a refutation was displayed by his eager wereacce a
of the assertion that where the artisans ,e
minority they would act like the Radicals
house, by joining their strength to that of
ever party would concede most to their demanoe.
a
—an assertion which he interpreted as a cows
fession that they would not act together meat was
for class purposes. An equal bewilder re ated
evinced in the clumsy manner in which he replees.
one_ of Mr. Gladstone's least ingenious art' on..
The proportion of the working classes to the 00e,
fourth, forgetting that this one
stituency of England, he said, would be but ° „0
belonya
wholly to the boroughs, and constitutes aim ref
majority there. So, again, he affirmed that 001)7 3
in a self-acting extension of the franchise 'war°.
fallacy, because the electors were not a larger go,
portion of the population bow than 1832!, for,
founding the whole constituency together, and for-
founding
getting that, while the farmers have been, grads'
Re-
ally and designedly extinguished by that authorfirst Re-
Bill of which Lord Russell claims the the
ship, the proportion of £lO householders teiace,
population has so increased as to supply their had the
and is still increasing in a far larger ratio thanoge
population. Such a supporter could only Hardy
both the bill and the Government, and Air•nt aces
had little trouble in demolishing in a few se—erva"
his confused and halting arguments. One °„,.bseased
tion, very pithily made by the last speaker, ooPTotes
at once of all the arguments drawn from Pastna the
and so-called pledges, so far as they bear UP't ft&
present issue. There have been pledges abotio by
form ; Reform Bills have been brought uses.
Ministers Ministers and read a second time by previous. ;
But this is no Reform Bill • it is a FraneinseA has
and every Franchise Bill hitherto introdue'-conv
been peremptorily rejected by the House that the
mons. Lord Eleho had shown, before,
on such
pledges of a previous Parliament cannot, that
a topic, be held to bind the present ; oat
of the present Parliament only 165 Liberator._ iw
of 367 pledged themselves on the not
luf this
form in any shape or kind—to say nothing °lit on
particular bill. Thus the one only argarnd_.
th°
which the Government has really rehe bof
only one alluded to in the introductory sPeecil the
Mr. Gladstone—has shared the fate of
subsequent reasons or excuses which their uilhe
has invented, and been swept away like chaff. t the
weight of argument is so terribly
la defeat has
Government and their bill—the 100 ie9l clef that
been so complete, so hopeless, so humiliating „her
even a victory in the lobbies would fail t changede elbv
it or them. No doubt votes are seldomjlea'r
reasoning or by eloquence; but men like t°, rote
tolerable and plausible reasons assigned for tueiiof
they are to give, especially if they are asa°c way
it, and a total want of pretext for a wrong voteubt
and does drive some to withhold it. No d°o,ke
majority is worth many arguments, and vi" lee i$
up for much inferiority in debate, but its
va
not unlimited, and it will not countervail an
alid
mentative defeat so palpable and so overwhe.ltitii;
that the defeated party incurs contempt and 11'241
for its absolute inability to justify its vote ;
1,, de-
not redeem a Minister who stands convicted in
bate of wilfully sacrificing the welfare of his eatli
try to the momentary purposes of his party, or 0,
which tampers with the Constitution of this COustrJ
for no better end than to conciliate a mutinous W.-
tion, and to prop the fortunes of a tottering Adel,l:
nistration. Even should Lord Grosvenor's arsen"
went be rejected, which it is difficult DOW to beliey°
possible, this bill is too much damaged to pass ; its
authors too deeply disgraced long to remain in power'

CRYSTAL PALACE.—ONE SHILLING DAY.—Thurs'
day, April 19.—Admission on payment, 1,807 ; ditto 1)1
season tickets, 1,435; total visitors, 3,242.
[ADVERTlsEmENT.]—Consumption, and all nervous, bilion9
stomach, and liver complaints, in every stage, are only ag;
gravate 1 and accelerated by drugs of every description.
perlecJy curable by Du Barry's health restoring Revslen'
Arabica Food, as proved by thousands of cases 1001 /$O.
been considered hopeless; such as indigestion (dysPeP
cough, asthma, consumption, habitual constipation Oar
lima, all gastric derangements, !Hemorrhoids, live 0113:6
plaints, flatulency, nervousness, biliousness' fevers, 9,1;-.
throats, diphtheria, catarrhs, colds, influenza, noises in
eruption;
head and ears, rheumatism, gout, impurities.
hysteria, neuralgia, irritability, sleeplessness, Reid"' Pts,
crawira
pitation, heartburn, headache, debility, droPsY,
spasms, nausea and sickness even in pregnancy or
chest,nte
sinking fits, bronchitis, scrofula, tightness of the rfh
pains in the pit of the stomach and between the shoal°.
cto,
&c. We quote a few.—Cure, No. 46,270. Mr. James lObessred
timber merchant, of Frio ley Surrey, of thirty years' di.isedeaf-
lungs, spitting of blood, liver derangement, and partial _euie
ness.—Cure, No. 47,121. Miss Elizabeth Jacobs, ac% is
indizest•on. e-stherinrs. tow spirits, and nerl'Lleg-
iancies.—Cure, o. 1,771. Lord Stuart de Decies, Lor--
832.
tenant of Waterford, of many years' dyspepsia.—N°•4g'esg,
Fifty years' indescribable agony from dyspepsia, nervoUsn
asthma, cough, const patios, flatulency, spasms, sickness, ot.r.
vomiting—Maria Jolly.- Cure No. 54,816. The Rev. Jaine9ity
Campbell, Fakenham, Norfolk, of indigestion and torPi,
of the liver, which had resisted all medical treatme:ib.
In tins, 11b, 2s Od ; 21b, 4s 6d ; 51b, 118 ; 121 b, 229 ; 2don;
ics.—Barry Du Barry and Co., No. 77, Regent-street, Lo
else
also Phillips, tea dealers, 8, King William-street ; lik .
"c.
at 61, Gracechurch-street ; 4, Cheapside ; 49, Bishopsg,
street Within ; 63, 150, and 298, Oxford-street.; 330, Striti7',
54, Upper Baker-street; 103, Tottenham-court-road
; 1
Upper-street, Islington, N.; Harvey, Notting-hill; 0%.-
Brothers, 65, High-street ; and Stubbs, Queen's-terrace,
John's-wood. London; and all respectable grocers and elle'
mist .—Beware of emulous imitations.

Births.
1.1 13.1
COWAN—On the 18th inst. at Woodslee Penieuick, —•
the wife of Charles W. Cowan, Esq., of a daughter. de..
STOKES—On the 19th inst C.
at 4, Glenraohr-terrace, ITY
vale, Blackheath, Mrs. 6. W. Stokes. of a daughter' f D.
STEWART—On the 18th inst., at Lewisham, the Wife
Stewart, Esq., barrister-at-aw, of a son. f D'
WARDEN—On the 17th iust ,at Tours, the wife °

• •
Warden, Esq., of a daughter.
Marriages.
BAKER—MoRTIEAU—On the 18th ilia., at St. Step. 6
late
Church, North Bow, Arthur Henry, third son of tbe S.
J. R. Baker, Esq., of Bow, to Clara, third daughter of
F. Mortieau, Esq., of Coborn House, Bow-road. fas,
YATES—ALIBERTIN—On the 19th inst., at Banstead, Sur•t-i: ,
William Yates, Esq., of Lincoln's-inn-, tu Ilenriedolr
youngest daughter of the late Rev. P. Aubertio, re-
of Chipstead, Surrey.
Deaths. , ~ r
uiLKE—On the 18th inst., Henr Billie, Es( . of St."- f°
v-olia,9s°'
street, Blackfriars-read, and of the Stio'cli:
aged 70. .I.,,ittbt
GLEN-sy - Oa the 16th inst., at The Wintong, Busher'''.
Herts, Wm. Glenny, Esq aged -4 ' TI (I.
~r .
GORDON—On the 16th inst. at at Blackhouse, Ayr: 14.-.'
A. Gordon, Esq., Netherm. uir, Aberdeenshire. ,oe t
GREENwELL—On the 17th inst., at 20, Fawcett-s'r
Sunderland, Richard Greenwe, Esq., aged 74.11° Park'
IIURST--On the 18th inst., at her house, ill 1
Sarah, widow of N. Hurst, Esq., ag Arty
ed 85. l'. °-
LEGARD—On the 12th inst., at Rome, Sir D'
gird, Bart., of Ganton, Yorkshire, aged 22. icilier,
MILLER—On the 12th inst., at Rome, Captain J. B.
late of t
tho 15th Hussars. *vas ,
STEwAßT—inst.,
On the 16th at Paris, John P* 6te
Esq., aged 56. Ch .rp selj.'
SHARP—On the 18th inst:: at Brighton, Mr. J. t-, a '
aged t______,..-/----
~,E;O4,
London : Printed and Published byWILIJAM AN;',i* ii2t
of No. 112, Strand, Painter, at Tar: .ittri Olin „ No. i 1
01
Strand, in the. Precinct of the Sooy .iu the tio''-
!` Bliddleem—Friday, April 20866.