The Sun.
London, England, 1857-02-20 00:00:00

rHE SUN, LONDON, FIVIDIAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 2O,

sat long in the house. He (Sir J. Graham) had sat in the
house along with his noble friend for more than 30 years,
and he had net forgotten that to him was due the repeal
of the Test and Corporation Acts—(hear)—to him the
country was mainly indebted for the Reform Bill of 1832.
To him the country was indebted for the introduction of
the poor-law into Ireland ; to him was due the commu-
tation of tithes. But he would not weary the house by
an enumeration of all the measures which had been car-
ried in consequence of the zeal and ability of his noble
friend. (Hear, hear.) If he (Sir J. Graham) could
have reconciled it to his sense of duty to give a silent
vote on the present occasion, he might well have rested
that vote on the speech of his noble friend. But having
en all former occasions abstained from discussing the
precise proposition now before the house, he would
state very shortly why he now intended to give it his
support. (Cheers.) If the house would bear with
him for a few minutes he would state what hadin-
fluenced his conduct up to the present moment in
dealing with measures of reform. Having announced
in 1832, when the Reform Bill was introduced, his
opinion that it was to be regarded as a final settle-
ment of the question, he had felt bound to resist a
further change on the ground of finality. But it had
been his fortune to live long enough to ascertain that
that ground was not tenable. Finality, applied to the
work of man, was a solecism iu terms, and that doctrine
must in the long run be found very absurd. Then again
he was of opinion that if other changes were to be intro-
duced, that which had become a bye-word—" a large
and comprehensive measure"—was expedient. Partly
from the apathy of the country, and still more from the
difficulty of introducing another large measure, no mea-
sure of a comprehensive character had been successful,
and it was not likely that such a measure would very
soon be successful. He therefore thought that such a
ground was no longer tenable. But he could not forget
that one of the measures which formed the basis of Lord
' Aberdeen's administration was a measure of reform en-
larging the franchise. (Cheers.) That declaration was
ma le on the formation of Lord Aberdeen's government.
In the year 1854, in the speech from the Throne, a
mea'ure of reform was recommended, the Abject of
which was to enlarge the franchise, and give additional
stability to the institutions of the country, and such a
measure was prepared with very great care. It was in-
troduced by his noble friend (Lord John Russell) on
behalf of the Cabinet, and was withdrawn on account of
the peculiar circumstance of the pressure of the war,
and of the measures consequent upon that war. That
measure, amongst many other provisions, included the
precise proposition of the hon. member for East Surrey.
(Hear, hear.) He admitted that the measure introduced
by the noble lord contained many other provisions,
which might be held to counterbalance the particular
effect of the proposition then under the consideration
of the house ; but if there were countervailing pro-
visions as bearing on the county franchise, it ought not
to be forgotten that that measure lowered in towns the
franchise of the citizen. (Hear, hear.) It proposed to
reduce the franchise from a 101. rating to a 6/. qualifica-
tion with a residence of two years and a half. There
were other provisions to which he might briefly refer.
There was a provision giving effect to a limited extent, to
the votes of the minority, and several new franchises were
created. It bad been truly stated, that while the county
franchise rested upon tenure there would have been a
grave objection to the introduction of such a measure as
the. present. But the Chandos clause introduced into
the Reform Act for the first time, as bearing on the
county franchise, tho addition of occupation of the
amount of 501. a year. Although the circumstances of
Ireland bad been very peculiar, the necessity of assimi-
lating in all its great principles the law of the United
Kingdom became every day more apparent, and in the
year 1850 the house fixed the representation of counties
in Ireland not on tenure in the main, but on occupation,
and the right of voting was pieced on an occupation
tenure of 121. He should feel the gravest objection tai
this measure if he believed it would introduce into the
counties of England any right of voting which would
subject to undue influence any greater proportion of
voters than now existed. (Hear.) He quite agreed
with the principle laid down by Mr. Fox, and which
had been quoted more than once by his noble friend,
that that is the best system of electing members of a
representative Government which includes the largest
number of independent voters, and excludes those who
from their circumstances and position are incapable of
independent deliberation. The test to apply to such a
proposition was this—would it introduce into the coun-
ties men of independent station who were now excluded,
or would it extend it to those who were incapable of in-
dependent deliberation ? Now his firm belief was that
this proposition would extend the franchise in a manner
that was perfectly safe. (Cheers.) He did not feel the
objection entertained by the noble lord at the head of
the Government, that the adoption of such a measure
would lead to the danger of electoral districts and only
one right of voting in the country. If he entertained
that opinion he should arrive at the same conclusion as
the noble lord. But there would always remain a broad
distinction between counties and cities in England.
The right of voting in cities was confined to occupation
to the limited extent of 101., whereas even if the present
measure should pass, there would be other tenures,
including the leasehold tenure, which were unknown in
cities and boroughs. (Hear, hear.) Now, if large and
comprehensive measures were no longer possible, consi-
dering the growing population, the growing wealth, and
the growing intelligence of the people of this country,
there was every reason to extend the franchise in some
other manner. If every extension of the franchise was
to he resisted—if the people were to be driven to what
was called " bit-hy-hit" reform—if they were driven to
the necessity of taking fragments of reform—the best
course was to take the safest, and that which in its ope-
rating would have the greatest effect. Looking at the
qnestion in that light he was decidedly of opinion that
this was the portion •f the measure of 1854 which night
be most safely introduce 6, and fur which he was ready to
give his vote. The effect of this measure in the English
counties would be to give the right of voting to many
persons who did not now possess it, but who were entitled
to it. It would include many of the working clergy, as
they were called—the curates—who were now excluded.
The dissenting ministers would to a great extent be ad-
mitted to the franchise. It would also include the half-
pay officers of both services, many retired tradesmen,
and clerks either in public offices origreat mercantile firms
who might have retired on peasions or superannuation.
Under such a franchise these classes would generally be
admitted. Then there would be the shopkeepers in
towns which had not the right to return members, suck
as Barnsley, Doncaster, Rotherham, and other places
similarly situated. (Hear, hear.) He might go further,
and say that the farmers of England were rising rapidly
to increased intelligence and great trustworthiness ; and
he knew not why some of the smaller farmers should not
in England, as in Ireland, have a share in the represen-
tation. • (Hear, hear.) He thought lie had said enough
to justify himself for the vote which for the first time he
was about to give in favour of this measure. (Cheers.)
He had the greatest regard for the hon. members for
West Surrey and East Norfolk. He might be exposed
to taunts for the vote he was about to give. But feeling
that his motives were pure, and that his conscience was
not touched by the slightest remorse, be should not
hesitate to give his support to the measure. (Cheers.)
In its progress through the house it would be necessary
to guard it against the abuse of making faggot votes,
and he would recommend the hon. member for East
Surrey to look at the precautions in that respect con-
tained in the bill of 1834. That bill contained pros i-
slow] with regard to joint tenancies, and to land con-
nected with houses and hovels of no worth, which would
give facilities to faggot voting which would not confer
the franchise unless coupled with the occupation of a
house of the value of 51. Feeling satisfied that the mea-
sure was a salutary and good one, he had no hesitation
in giving it his support. (Cheers.)
Mr. BENTINCK explained. He never said that the
noble lord had brought for ward no good measures while
in office, but that during the number of years the noble
lor.l was at the head et the Government, when he had
ample means of bringing forward a great measure of re-
form with the certainty of carrying it, he had never in-
troduced such a measure.

Mr. L. KING said that if the noble lord at the head
of the Government would consent to the introduction of
the bill, he (Ur. King) would make the best use of the
time allowed him for the purpose of passing it. If the
house should prefer a 24. qualification to that now pro-
• posed, the proposition might be considered in committee.
(Rear.) If the noble lord the leader of the liberal party
should press the house to a division, ho would find the
liberal members voting against him, and mu,t rely on
the support of the other side of the house. (Hear.)
Mr. S. HERBERT, having given the subject the
deepest consideraticn, felt perfectly satisfied as to the
propriety of the course which he was about to take.
He hadtwo distinct grounds for not giving his support to
the motion—ono which he derived from the state of par-
, ties in the house,'and the position of the Government ;
the other, in the nature of the question itself, and the
peculiar form in which ithad been submitted to the house.
It was quite true that theidentical proposal was contained
in the bill introduced by his noble friend (L ,rd J. Rus-
sell) as leader of the House of Commons, and that be
(Mr. S. Herbert), being the colleague of the noble lord,
gave his concurrence in that measure. But it should be
retnerub,red that the measure was brought forward n
only by the leader of the then Government, but by the
mail who, of all others, was best entitled to introduce
such a measure. (Hear.) Apin, it was brought forward
with all the weight and authority of the Government.
And it should be recollected that the proposition now
before the house was coupled with many other provisions
which tended in a great degree to neutralise its effects—
not in the way of diminishing its value and efficiency,
but with a view of extending its value as a portion of
a great measure of reform. He believed it was admitted
by the promoters of the original Reform Bill that its
great err e- was the anifarrnity of the franchise. No
doubt it was difficult to avoid uniformity. But it was
an error, because society was not uniform, and could not
be fairly represented by uniformity. The object of the
proposition before the bouse was to give an uniform
franchise to counties and boroughs. Was that done in the
bill of 1554? On the contrary, the proposition then was
to bring the county franchise down to 101,, and the bo-
rough,, franchise to (31. If the franchise was to be made
run, what would be the logical deduction ? If the
let franchise was to be the only one, how could the pre-
sent system be defended in allowing
two members to a town with 50,000 inhabitants, whilst no larger number
ware
vento a district containing half a mil-
of members was gr
'
other franchises introduced into the
bill of 1854. All the
graduates of the universities, all
persons deriving
an incomera ethaix, taxes, ;
under the bill, He
of 10/, from the funds, all
persons having 50/. in the
sa o
ti 4woel.r
ei n
at
dh
me shape
to assessed
the f
of bank, all persons pay-
licences, or income
had mentioned these facts for the
what a different position a question (1)1.11
rhpisoskeinoaf showing
when introduced as a solitary measure from that which
it occupied when it was a portion of a larger scheme.lfh
With regard to the position of parties and the Gove
moot, he epoke plainly of what was to all, when