The Sun.
London, England, 1866-04-05 00:00:00

The Reform Bill.

DEMONSTRATION AT ROCHDALE.
A public meeting of the inhabitants of Rochdale
was held last evening in the large mill of the Co-
operative Manufacturing Society in support of the
Government Reform Bill. The mill, which is
estimated as capable of containing 11,000 persons,
was densely crowded. The Mayor, Mr. Samuel
Stott, took the chair, supported by Mr. Bright, M.P.,
Mr. T. B. Potter, M.P., Messrs. G. L. Ashworth,
Petrie, Ileape, Robinson, T. Ashworth, Tatham,
Kemp, Moore, and the principal inhabitants of the
borough.
The proceedings having been briefly opened by
the Mayor,
Alderman G. ASHWORTH moved the following
resolution : _ . .

"That believing the Reform Bill recently introduced into
Parliament by Mr. Gladstone, though coming short of what
the unenfranchised were reasonably entitled to expect, will
if passed, prove a substantial and sensible advance towards
a fair representation of the people, this meeting tenders its
thanks to the Government for the measure and for their
expressed determination to supplement it by other neces-
sary reforms of Parliament, and resolves to use its utmost
endeavours to secure the passing of the bill into law."
He said the Bill of the Government, although not
what the people had a right to expect, was honest
as far as it went. Its principle was just, because it
recognised in some form the right of the occupier
of a house to vote for a Parliamentary representa-
tive. He alluded to the fact that the building in
which the meeting was held belonged exclusively to
the working classes, and said it was a stigma upon
the representative institutions of the country that
not a dozen of the owners of such magnificent pro-
perty possessed the franchise. If the bill now brought
forward by the Government was not carried, he
sincerely trusted that an appeal would be made to
the constituencies of the country. (A voice—" There
won't be many who will go back again.") (Great
cheering.)
Mr. PETRIE, a Town Councillor of Rochdale,
seconded the resolution.
Mr. T. B. POTTER, M.P., in supporting the mo-
tion, said he was not altogether satisfied with the
bill of the Government ; it was not sufficiently com-
prehensive for his views, but it was a substantial
step in the right direction, and was an honest bill,
introduced by an honest Government. He had full
confidence in Earl Russell and Mr. Gladstone, and
believed that they would stand true to the cause of
reform. The Conservatives, although they pretended
to take some interest in the question, were really
doing all in their power to shelve it. As to the re-
solution of Lord Grosvenor he agreed with Mr.
Gladstone, that it said one thing and meant another,
and that it was really undeserving of consideration.
It might be possible that jealousy and distrust on
the part of some of the great Whig families induced
them covertly to oppose the efforts of the Govern-
ment to settle the question, but there could be no
doubt that the most serious danger the bill was
likely to meet with was occasioned by treason in the
Liberal ranks rather than by Tory opposition. He
complained of the course which had been taken by
Mr. Lowe and Mr. Horsman, and said he was better
content to remain the trumpeter of Mr. Bright than,
like the right hon. members for Caine and Stroud,
to be his own follower and blow his own trumpet.
As to Lord Elcho, that noble lord had the disad-
vantage of being born in the ranks of the aristo-
cracy, but he would never succeed in crushing the
spirit of democracy under his heel, although he had
certainly done all in his power hitherto to set class
against class. With regard to Mr. Marsh, who
formed the tail of the malcontents, he would only
say this, that Australia had no reason to regret the
loss of his distinguished services.
The resolution was put by the MAYOR, and agreed i
to.

Alderman HE APE moved the next resolution—
" That the following petition in favour of the Govern-
ment Franchise Bill be adopted ; and that Mr. T. B
Potter, the member for the borough, be requested to pre-
sent it :—' That your petitioners having considered the pro-
visions of the bill to amend the representation of the
people, recently introduced into your hon. house by the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, hereby express their belief
that such bill provides an honest and safe extension of the
suffrage in counties and boroughs. That your petitioners
intends
during learnt with satisfaction that the Government
during the present session to lay before your hon. house
further measures for the reform of Parliament. Your pe-
titioners, therefore, pray your hon. house to pass the bill
already introduced without delay, and to reject all attempts
to defeat it or to alter its provisions, especially as far as
those provisions will extend and simplify the existing
franchise." (Cheers.)
Mr. ROBINSON, a member of Town Council,
seconded the resolution.
Mr. BRIGHT, M.P., who was received with over-
whelming cheers, then rose to support the motion.
As soon as silence was restored, the hon. gentleman
said—Mr. Mayor and fellow-townsmen—I very
much fear I shall not be able to make myself heard
by the thousands I see before me. Since the day
to which my hon. friend has just referred—since
last Saturday—I have been so hoarse that I could
scarcely speak, even in common conversation. I
must therefore ask you to be as quiet as possible, to
give me the slightest chance of being heard to-night.
It is but three months now since I was last per-
mitted to address any number of my fellow towns-
men on the question of parliamentary reform.
Many of you will recollect on that occasion I took
the liberty of giving some advice to reformers
throughout the country, and some also to those re-
formers who now compose her Majesty's Govern-
ment. I regret to say that, while the advice
I gave to reformers in general has been in the main
followed, that which I gave to her Majesty's Go-
vernment has not been followed so exactly as I
could have wished, for I found that when Mr. Glad-
stone brought forward the bill it differed in almost
every particular from that bill which I had urged
him and his colleagues to prepare ; but if we have a
Ministry or Cabinet composed of 14 or 15 persons of
both houses of Parliament, and if they are to be
held responsible for great measures submitted
to Parliament, of course it is but fair that we
should allow them an exercise of their judgment,
and make allowance for some difficulties which they
see, but which perhaps we did not see, and give a
candid and fair consideration to the measure which
they have proposed. Well, it is our business to
consider it and to accept it, or to condemn it.
Some of you will recollect the opinion which I pro-
nounced on it in the House of Commons. lam
glad to say that is the opinion which has been pro_
nounced on it by Reformers throughout every por-
tion of the kingdom. (Cheers.) The Liberal
party throughout the country have agreed to accept
the bill, believing it to be, as I then described it, an
honest bill, and to offer to the people a substantial
improvement on the Liberalcondetioinntohfeobuillrre p r
whiche -
sentation. But what there may
bengages our sympathy
and support, by so much it
necessarily courts the hostility and opposition of the
Tory -party ; and I think in what is now taking place
ex-
hibited,
Parliament we see the character of that party
whole history for the last hundred years, in a con-
as it has been exhibited throughout its
sistent and
persistent hatred of popular insti-
tutions---(hear, hear).—or in an attempt to keep the
government of this country permanently in a class,
and in a class whose sympathies with the people are
not such as to give us any kind of security that the
Government of the country will —be lust and gener-
ous, and wise. (Cheers.) At this moment the Tory
party in the house is exhibiting one of two things,
a more than usual depravity, or else a desperate ,
re-
solution to withstand every proposition of Reform.
If you go back to 1859 you will find in the news-
papers the record of a bill which Lord Derby's Go_
vernment proposed, and which Mr. Disraeli intro-
duced in the House of Commons. That bill pro- I
posed a <£lo franchise for the country, but the bill
of Lord Derby proposed to shut out from voting in
the counties all the freehold property that is within
the limits of boroughs. The object
was to confine
the county representation more strictly than ever, if
possible, to the powers of the great landed proprie-
tors, and to shut out from it all the influence of the
towns. Still, if a 10-pounder in the counties was
fit for the franchise by the bill of 1859, surely
a 14-
pounder in the county is fit for the franchise in the
bill of 1866, and yet the Tory party wish to get rid
of this bill, and object so far as I hear to this pro-
vision of the il4 franchise in the counties. Well,
in the boroughs the bill of Lord Derby made no