The Sun.
London, England, 1859-04-05 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMEN T

1834. But it did not suit the noble lord the member for
the City of London that the question should be in any
hands but his own. He adopted a course at that time un-
precedented, but which has furnished a sufficient prece-
dent for motions of the same description. The noble
lord introduced, to prevent the discussion of the measure, a
resolution, to the effect that no settlement of the tithe
question in Ireland could be satisfactory or final that did
not apply the surplus revenue of the Church to the object of
public education. That resolution answered its purpose ; the
• Government of Sir R. Peel properly and justly assumed that
the vote of the House of Commons on that resolution was
equal to a vote of want' of confidence. It resigned office ;
and what was the consequence ? It was that the settle-
ment of a great and important question was for a consider-
able time postponed, to the serious injury of Ireland ; and
when a settlement took place, under a Government of which
the noble lord himself was a member, that very provision,
deemed indispensable to a satisfactory settlement, was
omitted, and merged in oblivion. (Hear, hear.) But the
period at which the noble lord particularly distinguished
himself was when Sir Robert Peel quitted office in 1846. I '
need not remind your lordships of the circumstances of that
eventful year. Sir Robert Peel had broken up the Con-
servative party, and excited its resentment by the adoption
of the measure sanctioning the repeal of the corn laws.
It is unnecessary to go into the discussion of that question.
The course Sir Robert Peel took was warmly praised and
applauded by the Liberal party ; but that applause and that
praise did not prevent the noble lord from taking the opportu •
pity, on the very day on which the bill was read a third time
in your lordships; house, of moving a resolution against the
course of Sir R. Peel, who was again compelled to resign
office. Looking back to the conduct of the Conservative
party on that occasion, I am compelled to say that, in my
opinion, it savoured something more of resentment, and not
of unnatural resentment, than of justifiable opposition to the
Government. Ido not think they were justified, whatever
their feelings might be, to join in a vote which deprived the
Government of the power of maintaining tranquillity in
Ireland in the manner which the Government deemed in-
dispensable to the public service. In consequence of that
vote Sir Robert Peel resigned office, and the noble lord the
member for the city of London succeeded to the head of the
administration, adopting the principles and the measures
of the Minister whom he had succeeded. My lords, that
Minister with signal generosity extended the shield of his
protection over his previous opponents during the four years
that followed his resignation. By the aid of that portion of
the Conservative party which adhered to Sir Robert Peel
that Government was maintained in power to the close of
the year 1850. Sir Robert Peel died, as your lordships are
aware, in the year 1850, and at the commencement of 1851,
by no attack from others, but from their own intrinsic
weakness, the Government of the noble lord the member for
the city of London was reduced to such an extremity that
they felt themselves compelled to tender their resignation
to her Majesty. That was owing, Singularly enough, to a
vote on which the Government opposed, or pretended to
oppose, a motion brought forward by Mr. Locke King for
the reduction of the county franchise to £lO, and in oppo-
sition to which they succeeded in bringing by all their
efforts the large number of 48 persons to oppose a majority
of 100. The Government having upon that occasion, as
I have stated, fallen to the ground, it was 'necessary
for her Majesty to construct - another. I see at the
table a noble marquis, to whom I believe upon that occasion
her Majesty appealed for advice. I see a noble earl on the
other side whose advice and assistance her Majesty also
requested, and her Majesty at the same time did me the
honour of making, to me a proposal to undertake the re-
sponsibility of forming 'a Government. None of those noble
lords, nor I myself, were in a position to undertake so
serious a responsibility as the formation of a Government in
the then existing state of parties, and accordingly the Go-
vernment of 1851, without change or modification, was
again placed upon its legs. The Government then con-
tinued until the commencement of 1852, but in the-Interval
there had arisen dissensions in the Cabinet, upon what
ground I, of course, cannot pretend to say, between the
noble lord the member for the city of London and the
noble viscount the =ember for Tiverton, and the
result of those differences of opinion was that in the
month of December the noble viscount quitted the
office which he held in the Government of the noble
lord. [A noble lord—" Was turned out of the office.") But
if the noble viscount at that time quitted office, or, as has
been suggested behind me, was turned out of office, it was
not long before retaliation followed, for in February, 1852,
upon the motion of the noble viscount, the whole of his
previous colleagues were placed in a minority, and they
were compelled again to resign office. My lords, upon that
occasion I was again appealed to by her Majesty, and, look-
ing at the serious nature of the difficulties which her
Majesty had to encounter in forming a Government, I con-
sented very reluctantly to accept the responsibility that was
cast upon me. I need not say that that Administration was
not of very long duration. It commenced in the month of
February, and terminated in the month of December.
When that Government was overthrown, the noble earl
whom I see opposite was called upon by her Majesty to
form :an Administration upon a basis up to that, time
strange to the constitution of this counry. I recollect that
the noble earl upon that occasion expressed his opinion that
the country was so entirely sick and disgusted with the
differenbba and struggles of parties that he could safely con-
struct an Administration-Composed of members of all differ-
ences of opinion, and of all gradations of opinion ; and that
such an Administration iwould carry on satisfactorily the
government of the country. That Administration contained
among its members men of all shades of opinion—Le-veil from
those who, like the noble earl opposite, were at that time
the advocates of the doctrines of Liberalism to those who
were Radicals of the deepest dye. (Laughter, and " No,
no.") If that expression is supposed to be offensive, it at
all events cannot be denied that of that Administration the
late Sir W. Molesworth was a member. (" Hear, hear," and
a laugh.) Nor can it be denied that he belonged to what
was then called the extreme Radical party. Well, my lords,
the noble lord the member for the city of London ac-
cepted the office of Foreign Secretary, but shortly after-
wards the noble lord, finding, I suppose, that the duties of
that office were incompatible with the labours attaching to
the leadership of the House of Commons, resigned that
office, and, I think, for the space of a year, or a year and
a-half, or something more, he remained in the Cabinet with-
out office and, I believe, without salary. At that time, to
use an expression of the noble earl opposite, we were just
beginning to drift into that war which led to such calamities,
but, at the same time, to such glory, to those who were
engaged in it. The attention of Parliament was altogether
directed from the commencement of that war—and I am
quite sure the noble lord opposite will admit that it was di-
rected without any hostile feeling, or without any manifes-
tation of a desire to embarrass the Government—to the pro-
secution of that war, and to the promotion of the interests
of the country in which we live. But in the month of
June, 1854, the noble lord again changed his office. He
then accepted the office of President of the Council. Your
lordships will not have forgotten that towards the close of
the year 1854 there was a threat of a motion to directly im-
peach the conduct of her Majesty's Government with regard
to the war, and of a measure to inflict upon them the
strongest condemnation. That measure did not originate
from their Conservative opponents. It originated in the
heart of the Liberal ranks. With no little dissatisfaction,
I think, to the Government, and to the astonishment of the
public, a few days before that motion was brought under
discussion in the House of Commons the noble lord the
member for the city of London said it was impossible for
him to defend the proceedings or the measures of his col-
leagues, and, retiring before the storm which had been ex-
cited, he left them to fight their own battle with their own
weapons. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) That step of the
noble lord and the motion subsequently brought forward by
Mr. Roebuck for the appointment of a committee of inquiry
into the conduct of the Government in that respect led to
the resignation of the Government of the noble lord. That
was in 1855. Again her Majesty did me the honour of
asking me whether I would then undertake to conduct the
business of the country. I thought upon that. occa-
sion that with the co-operation of some noble
lords and of some right honourable gentlemen, I might
be enabled to discharge that task, however imper-
fectly. That co-operation was refused me, and I have no
right to complain that it was so. Greatly, as I think, to his
credit, the noble viscount the member for Tiverton with
signal courage accepted the arduous task imposed upon him.
He undertook the Administration of the Government at a
most critical period. Within a very short time after the noble
viscount accepted office—l think within a very few weeks
—there was another change.of Government. He was left
by three, I think, of his most distinguished colleagues, who
could not agree with him in the propriety of permitting an
inquiry to go on into the conduct of the war, and upon their
retirement the noble viscount again called upon the noble
lord the member for the city of London to undertake the
duties of the Colonial Department. While the noble lord
held the seals of that department he undertook also a mission
in a diplomatic capacity to Vienna. My lords, the noble lord
was not very successful in his diplomatic career. (Laughter.)
So considerable was the dissatisfaction which that careerpro-
duced in the minds of his colleagues upon his return that I
believe there is no doubt the noble lord was requested to re-
sign office. His resignation again caused considerable in-
convenience to the Cabinet. The noble lord, I think, since
that period has never been a member of any Government.
But far be it from me to say that he is less active. (Laughter.)
In the year 1857 the noble lord took a prominent part in the
House of Commons, a part which I cannot by any means con-
d emn,becaused I took a similar part in yotulord ships' house in
bringing forward in terms of condemnation the proceedings
upon the coast of China. That, as your lordships know,
led to another Ministerial crisis. It led to a dissolution of
Parliament, and to the calling of a new Parliament—to the
signal success of the noble viscount the member for Tiver-
ton. Now, my lords, that Parliament—which is this Parlia-
ment—was summoned under considerable excitement. It was
summoned, in consequence of an appeal to the passions and
sympathies of the country in favour of the noble viscount
individually as one who upheld the insulted honour of the
country against combinations and cabals, and I know not
what else. He claimed the support of all those, whatever
their political opinions might be, who desired to main-
tain the honour and dignity of the flag of England. (Hear'
hear.) The noble viscount enjoyed another signal advan-
tage in calling that Parliament together, and I well recol-
lect saying at the time that, although there might be suc-
cess attending that election, that suecess was insecure, and
that majority was a majority not to be depended upon, be-
cause it consisted of persons who supported the noble
viscount from the most opposite causes, some believing him
to be the soundest and stanchest of Conservatives, and
others believing, and naturally so, as he had accepted the
leadership of the Liberal party, that he alone was the head
of the Liberal party. My lords, it is not too much to say
that the Parliament of 1857 set' up the noble viscount as a
political idol. He returned to Parliament with an over-
whelming majority.; but, as I said before, a majority
founded upon no principles, and the continuance of which
consequently was not to bo calculated upon. Accordingly
not a year elapsed from the time that Parliament was as-
sembled before it broke the idol which it had set up, and
gain argong the principal executioners was his noble friend
`tAihe member for the City of London. (Cheers`and• a laiigh4
I am coming now to the close of this long statement, for
whiob. I hno to apologise to your lordships, but I wish to

show you what is most seriously important, and what may
well call for reflection on the part of all those wild krre the
British constitution, what is infinitely more important than
the success of this or that particular measure—infinitely
more important than the overthrow or the rise of this
or that Ministry—l want to point out the danger to our
Parliamentary system arising from these constant changes
and fluctuations year by year— not a single year passing
without its Ministerial crisis, hardly a year passing with-
out a Ministerial abandonment of office. (Cheers.) My
lords, I solemnly declare, if that system is to be persevered
in—if that system is permitted by the people of England
to be continued, there is an end to all hope of the stability
of Governments ; there is an end to all chance of govern-
ment upon a system—there is serious injury done to
the political influence of Parliament at home, and
there is a serious depreciation of the weight and influence
of England in the affairs of Europe. (Cheers.) When in
1858 her Majesty graciously called upon me to undertake
the duties of the office which I have now the honour to
hold, as I have already stated to your lordships on it former
occasion, I placed before her Majesty unreservedly our posi-
fion in the House of Commons ; I pointed out to her Ma-
jesty that at that time I could reckon upon the support of
little more than one-third of the House of Commons, and
consequently, that if there were a combination of the re-
mainder of the house against me and those who acted with
me we should be left in a permanent minority varying frOm
120 to 150. I requested—l may_ say I urged upon her Ma-
jesty to reconsider the command which she had places upon
me, and I ventured to solicit that her Majesty would con•;
eider whether, among the other leaders of the house, and
among the various parties in the house, there were not some
to be found who could conduct the affairs of the country
with a greater certainty of being able to command the con-
fidence of the House of Commons than I could for a single
moment pretend to. Her Majesty graciously took the time
for which I had asked to consider, and on the following day
—and not until the following day—her Majesty informed
me, upon full consideration, that it was her wish and de-
sire that I should undertake the responsibilities of the office
which I now hold. So urged, my lords, and seeing the
difficulty in which the Crown was placed, and the incon-
venience to which Parliament was exposed by these fre •
quent changes, I felt it to be my duty not to shrink from
the responsibility or the labours which her Majesty sought
to impose on me. (Hear, hear.) I undertook office know-
ing that I was in a minority in the Howie of Commons ;
I undertook it in the firm desire faithfullY and dili-
gently to discharge those duties which , were placed on
my shoulders ; I undertook it in the hope that by a steady
adherence to business, by attending to the interests of the
country, by seeking not to embitter but rather to conciliate
party differences, by endeavouring to maintain the honour
of the country abroad and to promote its prosperity at
home, I might so far conciliate an adverse majority of
the House of Commons that they would allow me without
obstruction to carry on the business of the country until, at
all events, it could be made clear that there was some one
large, definite party able to carry out their own policy, ready
to replace me, and likely to enjoy the confidence of the two
Houses of Parliament, as well, as of the country. I hope I
may say that during the 12 months in which I and my col-
leagues have, held office we have not neglected the duties be-
longing to our respective positions. (Hear, hear.) I hope
that we have not neglected the interests of this country at
home ; I am sure that we have laboured to maintain and
uphold its honour abroad. (Cheers.) And I firmly believe
at this moment-4 have no wish to speak boastfully of our-
selves, or disparagingly of other s—but Ido firmly believe
that if the peace of Europe is yet to be maintained, it will
have been owing to the unceasing efforts and untiring vigi-
lance of my noble friend the Secretary of State for Foreign
Affairs, and to the attitude which, under his guidance and
at his suggestion, Parliament and the Country have assumed
with regard to the political objects nowin question. (Cheers.)
I should be unjust, however, to the noble lords who sit
opposite—and more especially unjust to the noble earl lately
at the head of the Foreign-office—if I did not-admit that
with regard to all foreign business, and,indeed, with regard
to the transactions of 'all business generally): vie, hiive met
from them nothing but cou,reefay and fair play, e:4oear.)
The noble sarl es.pecially has, een studiously ails hub-
-4
lation to the foreign deparfikent, the difficulties' 'which hs
well knows, not to embarrass her Majesty's Government by,
the interposition of any untimely questions or the introduc- '
tion of any unseemly discUssions. (Hear, hear.) I may
also say that, after one attempt made very shortly after the ,
Government succeeded to office, and which—though at one,
time it had a most formidable appearance, considering the
hosts that were mustered against us, yet before the wish of
the country and the power and force of reason melted away
like a snowball in the sun, so that they not only did not
bring their threatened resolution of condemnation to a '
vote, but begged to be permitted to withdraw it. After
that event we had no reason to complain of the interference
of the House of Commons with the management of the
affairs of the country. - (Hear, hear.) There were, however,
remaining froth our predecessors two or three questions of
very considerable difficulty, which had baffled the skill and
power of preceding GovernmentS, and which were left to us
as a species of damnosa hceriditas, with which, if we should
find ourselves able, it would be our duty to grapple. Of
those questions, perhaps the most important--certainly the
one which had been-the most frequently before the public,
and which had been assumed to be the favourite project of
the Governments which had preceded us—was the question
of Parliamentary Reform. It was not only the noble lord
the member for London, who in the discharge of his duty
had thought it necessary from time to time to bring that
question under the notice of Parliament, but two successive
Governments—that of the noble earl opposite, and of the
noble viscount the member for Tiverton—had pledged them-
selves and had pledged their Sovereign, by the speech from
the throne, to introduce a measure of Parliamentary Reform.
Nay, more, my lords, the noble lord the member for the
City of London had upon two occasions—in 1852 and in
1854--embodied his propositions and his schenie in two dif-
ferent bills, and your lordships, I am sure, will all recollect
that very pathetic scene when, almost with ears in his eyes,
the noble lord, in 1854, was compelled, under the pressure
of the foreign war, to abandon his favourite project of re-
form. Now I say, in passing, that though the war in 1854
formed a very convenient apology for not proceeding with
the measure which a member of the Government was very
anxious to undertake, it has been whispered—it was whis-
pered at the time, and it has been repeated with somewhat
1 more confidence since, and I believe I may say that it is
hardly a secret, that there was another and more formidable
obstacle to proceeding with that measure of Parliamentary
reform, and that between the noble lord and the noble
viscount there was on the subject of that measure so in-
superable a difference of opinion that, although the noble
viscount consented to remain a member of the Government
till the bill was read a second time, it was well known that
there were provisions in that bill to which he had signified
his intention never to assent, and that if that measure had
been proceeded with in 1854 it would have broken up the
Government of the noble lord. (Hear, hear.) Again, in
1857, engagements were taken by the Minister of the day
in the name of the Sovereign that that measure of Parlia-
mentary reform should be dealt with in the ensuing session.
I cannot but say that in giving those pledges I think that
the Governments of both those noble lords exercised their
power very imprudently and unwisely. I think that it is
not consistent with the respect due to the Sovereign—
that it is not consistent with the respect due to Parliament,
that measures should be announced in the speech from the
throne with regard to which I will not only say that no bill
had been prepared, but with regard to which 1 will further
say that no progress had beeen made towards the formation
of a bill, and that I believe no serious intention existed of
ever bringing one forward. (Hear, hear.) In succeeding,
therefore, to the inheritance of that long-deferred legacy I
consicered it my duty to undertake—not indeed the intro-
duction of a measure, but in concurrence with my colleagues
carefully and deliberately to consider the whole question,
and to ascertain whether it might be possible, consistently
with our political opinions and principles, and which yet
should have a chance of obtaining the sanction and assent
of Parliament. I was encouraged to believe that we might,
in bringing forward such a measure, look for a fair amount
of countenance and support, because while it was in pro-
gress we were assured from time to time how desirable it
was that no further delay should (occur in the settlement
of the question. (Hear.) Wo were constantly told how im-
portant it was that we should not go too far, that our measure
could not be too moderate, that it could not be too small, that
it could not be too far removed from those dangerous doe-
trines and extensive principles of reform which were advo-
cated by persons who, though they belonged to the Liberal
party, yet had no sympathy with the great Whig leaders.
We undertook the question, and we prepared a bill, and
as soon as the Liberal party were free from the responsibi-
lity of carrying a measure there was no end to the anxiety
and the pressure that not a single day should be lost in sub-
mitting a measure to Parliament. (Laughter.) But what
took place in the meantime P The member for the City of
London had made no secret—he had spoken openly, and,
before numbers, of his confidence, that whenever the Con-
servative party should bring forward a Reform Bill that
would be the moment for the Liberal party to overthrow
them, whatever might be the character of the measure.
(Hear, hear.) Distinguished members of the previous Go-
vernment made speeches, in which they said that any Go-
vernment which undertook to bring in a Reform Bill would
incur a serious responsibility; that it must be prepared to
satisfy the country that any reform was wanted ; and, more-
over, a right hon. baronet, a leading member of the last
Administration, intimated his opinion that the Government
were in a dilemma with regard to the measure of reform,
from which they would find it impossible to extricate them-
selves ; because, either they must propose to reduce the
county. franchise to £lO, or else they would find themselves
in a minority in the House of Commons, which would never
be satisfied with a smaller reduction. But, since we have
brought forward a bill reducing the county franchise to £lO
we have been told by the very same gentleman that if we
had been contentedwitha £2O franchise we should have had
no difficulty in passing our bill ; and we have heard that
language from thosewho were members of the Governments
which had upon two successive occasions proposed a £lO
franchise, and who had themselves supported Mr. Locke
King's motion. The noble lord the member for the City in
particular had given as his reason for supporting that mo-
tion, that he saw no reason why the inhabitant of a county
should not vote on as low a franchise as the inhabitant of a
town, and on that ground he voted for the bill to reduce the
county franchise to the same level as the borough franchise.
And now ive are told that the signal defect in our bill, that
which shows our recklessness and blindness, is the bringing
down of the county franchise to the same amount as the
borough franchise, and refusing to lower the borough fran-
chise below the county franchise. This is not the proper occa-
sion to vindicate the provisions of our bill ; if it were, I
should be prepared to discuss them calmly and deliberately,
and to offer such grounds for their adoption as, though they
might not persuade your lordships to adopt them, would at
least show that they were not proposed without due consi-
deration. (Hear, hear.) What I wish, however, to im-
press upon your lordships is, that in that bill we dealt with
the question in such a manner as largely to add to the num-
bers of the constituent body of the country, to give the
suffrage to a much larger number of persons than had ever
previously enjoyed it, and to a larger number than would
have been entitled to it under either of the bills introduced
by the noble lord the member for the city. In drawing up
our bill we had tho advantage of the great experience of the
noble lord, and we had the double advantage of being
fortified by his authority, whatever
for
cours
e
adopted in the provisions of ourbill,tehewree was no
single point on which the two bills of 1852"
852(Aaniadulg.)85h4
were not diametrically opposed to each other.
The bill of-1852 proposed a £2O county franchise, the bill
of 1854 proposed a £lO
with
onefranchise;
y?aetpsill residence;o f 1852
tproposedhe bill 11
a £5 borough franchise,
of 1854 proposed a £6 rating franchise, h
ise,
the
2hi
olea& resi.. I
dence and payment of rates during e w of that
period. The bill of 1852 proceeded upon the principle of
not disfranchising a single borough ; the bill of 1854 dis-
franchised 63 boroughs. (Laughter.). The bill of 1852
enfranchised two new towns; the bill of 1854 did not
enfranchise new constituencies except to a limited ex-
tent, but distributed among constituencies already repre-
sented additional members, of whom 47 were allotted to
I think, and 16 or 17 to boroughs.
counties, Therefore we
might have fortified ourselves by the example of the noble
lord, whether we had adopted the principle of disfran-
chising or not disfranchising, whether we had grouped
boroughs or not,_whether we had, lowered the franchise in
counties to £2O or £lO, or whether we had adopted the £5
or £6 franchise' in beriaughs with thepericd 'of residerAs
mentioned We were not ashamed of availing ourselves of
the noble Joao great experience and knowledge, We care-

fully considered the separate provisions of his two bait s, and,
where we found valuable provisions, no fear of beim tg ac
cused of plagiarism deterred us frora making use of them.
In taking that course we certainly had a right to sale elate
on a fair and impartial consideration of the measure "w.
we laid before Parliament. (Hear..) In the Speech from the
Throne her Majesty bespoke for that measure, and in th eir
answers to that Speech both houses undertook to give to it,
that calm and -impartial consideration which was propor-
tionate to the magnitude of the interests involved. But I
think I may appeal to your lordships whether in the House
of Commons the course pursued was consistent with that
fair requirement or with the assurance given by Parlia-
ment. (Loud cheers.) I would not have complained, nor
would my colleagues have complained, if, after the bill
had been introduced in a speech of singular clearness and
ability by my right hon. friend the'Chaneeller of the
Exchequer; and if after at the request oeskon. members
opposite the desired period for consideration' of its details
had been allowed, those opposed to the Government had
taken objection to the principle of the bill, add had re-
jected it upon the second reading as unworthy of their
acceptance, or even if they had sought to modify ; its
details in committee. For myself and my colleagues, I. may
say that, in introducing that measure, we did not seek to
gratify this or that party—(hear, hear)—we did not seek to
serve party or political interests—(hear)—we did not seek to
excite in its favour that factious enthusiasm which it might
have raised had we made it a one-sided party measure—
(hear, hear)—but we sought to lay such a measure before
Parliament as might command the reasonable approbation
of moderate and thinking men, and might be accepted as the
solution of a very important and difficult question. (Hear,
hear.) Had that bill been permitted to take the usual Par-
liamentary course, had it been allowed to go into ceinmittee,
we should have been prepared to vindicate there its provi-
sions ; but if on any of them the decision of the house had
been adverse to our views, we should have considered our-
selves perfectly at liberty to consider calmly whether that
decision was so much at variance with the principle of the
bill as to make it inadmissible, and if we had found that the
alteration made did not 'seriously interfere with the prin-
ciple of the bill, no amount of false pride would have deterred
us from accepting it. (Hear, hear.) But that was not the
course pursued. (Hear, hear.) It was felt that this was a just,
fair, and on the whole a reasonable measure. (Cheers.) It
was felt with alarm, by those who thought they had the
monopoly of reform in their hands, that this was a measure
which would commend itself in the main to the deliberate
consideration of the country--(hear, hear)—and they deter-
mined—and I cannot but complain of that determination,
and the mode in which it was carried out—(hear)—that a de-
liberate consideration it should not receive, and that the dis-
cussion of it should be anticipated by a resolution which was
not unprecedented, because the noble lord the member
for the city of London had himself furnished a precedent for
it. A very high authority in your lordships' house, and a
very high authority elsewhere, derived from a long experi-
ence of public business, have expressed themselves in
terms of very great doubt as to whether that motion was
admissible or not. The highest authority in the other house
ruled it otherwise, and of course I havenothing to complain
of on that point ; but, to say the least of it, the motion was
one calculated to prevent the House of Commons,•Parlia-
ment, and the country, from judging fairly and fully of the
merits of the measure. (Hear, hear.) I can conceive no
course more dangerous, more prejudicial to the conduct of
affairs in Parliament than, when a measure of this impoimport-
anceis proposed, to seek to pass by anticipation a sweeping
censure upon portions of it which it was perfectly compe-
tent to discuss subsequently in 'committee, and thereby to
prejudice the house, and prevent its opinion being known
to the country. lethis measure had gone on—even sup-
pose it had never passed—we should have had an expression
of opinion from the house on its various provisions ; we
should have known the mind of Parliament, and we should
have been able to compare it with the opinions of the peo-
ple out of doors. But vie stand in this position now—after
seven nights' debate, not on the bill, but on the amend-
ment of the noble lord, we are left In entire ignorance as to
what those who oppose the bill would substitute in place of
it. It is not to be believed that it was proposed undesignedly
or without purpose, and for the purpotie it was a very wise
resolution, because it evaded a fairdiscussion and introduced
prejudice against the provisions of the bill. (Cheers.) It
was with no slight touch' of irony that the noble lord the
member for Tiverton, if T am rightly, informed; told his
noble friend the member• for the city of London, who com-
municated to him his intended resolution, thatit was an ex-
cellent resolution,-and admirablyadapted for the purpose for
which it was intended. But what was that purpose ? The
purpose was, and it was all but avowed, to destroy the bill,
and to destroy the Government who introduced the bill,' be-
fore they had the power of explaining, debating, or dis-
cussing the measure. It was a wise resolution; and very
well adapted for the purpose for which It was intended.
(Hear, hear.) In that indefinite amendment the Government
had no means of judging, and no intimation was :thrown
out, of the extent to which it wished the borough
franchise should- be reduced.' Wisely and very cautiously
was it so framed, because .the very moment- that any
substantive ioroposition had been Made for the substitution
of some other sum for the £lO borough franchise, that
Moment all the slumbering discord prevailing through the
whole bulk of what is called the Liberal party would have
been brought to light, and would have shown that, although
agreed on the condemnation of the Government scheme,
there was no possible variety of opinion not represented by
some section, and that, with regard to the substitution of
any specifio proposition for that of the Government if called
upon to do it, it was absolutely impossible they could suc-
ceed in carrying it out or veiling the hollowness, the discord,
or the want of coherence between those who upon the whole
were invited and induced to accede to a vague and indefinite
resolution. (Cheers.) I say that the course pursued was
not in accordance with the pledge given to the Crown in the
Address; it was not consistent with usual Parliamentary
practice; it was not consistent with true patriotism, or a
sincere desire to settle a question which it was known had
produced, and must produce by postponement, consider-
able excitement and greater difficulty in the way of its
settlement. (Hear, hear.) An opportunity was presented
to Parliament 'honourably and creditably to settle this
great question. They have preferred the interests of party
to the interests of the country (cheers), and without for a
single moment calculating how the Government could be
replaced, some with a purpose, some unwittingly, some
through ignorance, consented to a resolution, the certain
effectof which was the overthrow of the Government and
the destruction of the bill. (Hear, hear.) With regard to
the borough franchise, the noble lord the member for Lon-
don was asked what amount he proposed, and he said cava-
lierly that he was not called on to say. But I think, with
due deference to that noble lord, the question was most ma-
terial to the consideration of the resolution, because had the
question been between £lO and £B—l say, for example, had
the question been between £lO and £B---it might not have
been very difficult to come to an agreement. It was also
very desirable to know whether the opinion of the House of
Commons, which was averse to £lO, was equally averse to
£B, to £6, to £5, to household suffrage, to manhood suffrage,
or whether, in point of fact, any scale was regarded as one
upon which a decision could be formed and a measure in-
troduced upon an intelligible principle to secure the assent
of the House of Commons. (Hear, hear.) But even with
regard to the effect of the measure there was a difference of
opinion among those who supported the amendment. Some
of them declared, like the noble lord the member for the
City, that they were anxious to defeat altogether a noxious
and dangerous measure. It might have occurred to the
noble lord that if it were so noxious and dangerous a mea-
sure, there was a fair and legitimate opportunity of defeat-
ing it upon the second reading. (Hear, hear.) The noble
lord shrank from that ordeal, because he believed that if it
were permitted to go to that stage it would be infallibly
carried, and the measure left for fair consideration in com-
mittee. (Hear.) Others said they voted for the amend-
ment because they concurred in the principle which it enun-
ciated, but they did not intend to vote against the second
reading. They intended first to vote for the resolution, and
then to vote for the second reading of the bill. It was in
vain that my right hon. colleagues over and over again as-
sured those gentlemen that they grossly deceived them-
selves if they imagined for a single moment that it was pos-
sible for their expectations to be realised—that the amend-
ment proposed by the noble lord would be accepted by the
Government, as it was intended by the noble lord, as fatal
to the measure, and fatal to the existence of the Govern-
ment. However, among those who entertained a different
Opinion, or professed a different opinion--and it is at once a
sample of the perfect unanimity and good understanding
among the leaders in the Liberal camp—among those who
professed most solemnly no intention to destroy the bill, and,
on the contrary, desired to see it carried with amendments—
among those who entirely differed as to many objections of
the noble lord the member for the City of London, one who
prominently put forward that doctrine was the noble vis-
count lately at the head of the Government, and now by
courtesy, and nominally, I believe, leader of the Opposition
in the House of Commons. (Cheers.) But in noticing the
observations of that noble viscount I must refer to that to
which I alluded in an earlier portion of this address—l
must refer to that advice which he considered consistent
with his position to offer, and consistent with our honour to
listen to—namely, that we should be permitted neither to
retire, nor to dissolve, nor to withdraw the bill, bin that we
should be condemned to keep our places and in those places
to do the bidding—(derisive cheers)—my lords, the noble
viscount's expression was "to do uur bidding." I should
like to know to whose bidding it was intended we should
defer. Was it the bidding of the noble viscount, who prefers
a £2O to a £lO franchise, and has only very lately, as he
ingeniously confessed, become a convert to a reduction
below £lO in the borough franchise ? Or was it the bidding
of the noble lord the member for the city of London ? Or
was it the bidding of the right hon. baronet the member for
Carlisle, who with the noble lord concerted and concocted
this precious amendment—(cheers)—and who intimated
that in his opinion the proper franchise to introduce, and
beyond which it was not safe to sanction, was the borough
municipal franchise, with no very great or decided aversion
to the introduction, if need be, of voting by ballot F (Hear,
hear.) I think I may refer to the noble earl who sits oppo..
site whether the reduction of the Parliamentary franchise
to that of the municipal franchise would be a great im-
provement on the present system, judging by the evidence
which is given day by day before the select committee, the
appointment of which he moved. For my own part, ,I
am perfectly satisfied that the introduction of the muni-
cipal franchise would throw the whole representation of
intelligence and education to exercise
these boroughs into the hands of numbers and classes
least qnalified by
that franchise with judgment and safety. (Hear, hear,
and cheers.) But, my lords, whose bidding was it that we
were to follow P According to the noble viscount, whose
slaves were we to be ? Were we to be the servants
of the noble viscount, or the servants of the noble
lord, or the servants of the right hon. baronet the member
for the city of Carlisle, or the servants of the hon. member
—l:think now, hon. member for Birmingham ? (Cheers.)
Our bidding I" If that motley and heterogeneous assem-
bly which calls itself in the House of Commons the Liberal
telany not
on 25thme n party had been asked to tell us what " our bidding" was,
probably
injunc-
tionstotheher
humbleagreedas
slaves,
Ma-
jesty's Ministers. (Cheers.) But it is hardly necessary to
say to any one, that as long as we have the honour to serve
her Majestrin the responsible situation of Ministers of the
Crown we will do no one's bidding except the bidding of
our Sovereign and the bidding of our own consciences and
our own honour. (Loud cheers,) " You shall not retire
from office," says the noble viscount ; and does the noble
viscount intend to prevent our resignation ; if we think fit
to tender it and her Majesty think fit to accept it ? (Hear)
He may mean—and I do not dispute the fact—" You can-
not resign office, because if you do it is impossible to find a
Minister to succeed you. (Cheers.) I look round and see I
have no chance. (Laughter.) I look at my noble friend, and
not only hashe no chance, but his accession is the last thin
which would enter into my wishes or hopes. (Cheers and
laughter.) I look to the hon. member for Birmingham, and
I know the Crown will not accept him, Parliament will
not accept him, the country will havenone of him. (Cheers.)
He has tried the country, and the country has rejected his
be
wild and extravagant proppsals as entirely unworthy to
taken into consideration." (Cheers.) I offer an apology to
• the noble viscount if I have mietunclerstood. his expression
that we cannot resign by supposing he meant we were not
to be permitted to resign, instead of that we did resign, we
should be speedily reinstated. (Bear, hear.) The noble
heat
,
viscount went on, and in the Net ax„
_ument, , in th
otdebate, I presume, irsedtinftplt seiortVhiCh -certaihly
should not have expected from one who has had a long
scpAaiutance with the coustitUtioll4l WitOry pf the cm.