The Sun.
London, England, 1859-03-25 00:00:00

ROW GOES THE DEBATE?

(From the Times.)

Opinions vary as to the time when the debate on
the Ministerial Reform Bill will be brought to a
close. Some well-informed persons believe that it
cannot last beyond this evening, others consider
that it cannot come to a conclusion before Tuesday
night, while others, strengthened by innumerable
precedents of Parliamentary long-windedness,
adopt the plausible, but by no means agreeable
theory, that if the house once prevails upon itself
to enter upon the second week it will feel itself
unable to part from a subject on which everybody
has something to say until that second week be
brought to a close. We must await the result
patiently, drawing such comfort as we may from
the consideration that, like all human things, the
discussion will have an end, and, as that consum-
mation ma? overtake us sooner than we expect, we
think we shall be discharging a useful duty if we
point out as clearly as we can to our readers the
exact form in which a rather intricate question will
be finally submitted to the decision of the house.
The original motion before the house is, " That
the Bill for the Representation of the People be
now read a second time." The essence of this
proposition is in the word " now," so that,
if it were to be met with a direct negative,
the only effect would be to prevent the bill
being read a second time on that day,
leaving it open to the proposer of the bill to renew
the motion on any other day for which the house
might think fit to order the second reading to stand.
It is this inconclusive nature of the direct negative
which prevents its employment in Parliamentary
warfare, and has driven the opponents of bills to
have recourse to, n apparently less direct but really
more efficient method of opposition, by moving the
postponement of the order for the second reading
of the bill to a period sufficiently distant to fall
upon some day after the prorogation of the house.
This is the meaning of the usual motion, " That
the bill be read a second time this day six months."
By way of amendment to the original motion,
" That the Bill for the Representation of the People
be now read a second time," Lord John Russell has
moved " That all the words after the word that'
be omitted," and ,that the words contained in his
resolution be inserted instead. Let us now see all
the different events that can result from this state
of things. The first question the Speaker will have
to put is, that the wards propoSed by Lord John
Russell to be left out " stand part of the question,"
those words being "the bill be now read a second
time," Let us suppose—and only by way of sup-
positi.on—that this question is decided in favour of
the Government—that is, that the house decides
that the words proposed to be left out shall stand
part of th,c, question. Such a resolution will get
rid of Lord John Russell's amendment, not directly,
but by refusbg to make room for it in the question
—in other words, by giving the preference to the
words of the quotion, as they now stand, over the
suggested alteration. Another effect, we believe,
will be to shut out ally further amendment, for the
house, having reiolvea that the words shall stand
part of the question, cannot proceed to entertain
amendments like that of Mr. Divett, that the
word "now" be struck out, for the purpose of
adding the words "this day six months," the very
foundation of which is an alteration of the words
which the house has just resolved shall stand.
With this exception, matters will then be exactly
in the same state as if no amendment at all had
been moved ; the house will have decided what the
question submitted to it shall be, but will have
delivered no decision on the question itself. The
Speaker will then put the original question, " That
the bill be now read a second time." If that be
resolved in the affirmative, the second reading is
carried; if in the negative, the second reading is
refused for that day, but may be moved, as we
said before, on any future day for which it may
be appointed. It thus appears that Lord John
Russell's amendment, even if not successful, will
have the effect of preventing any other amendment
from being interposed between the House and the
decision of the main question, and that it is only
in the event of the second reading being negatived
that any further, amendment can take place.
Let us now' consider the other and more pro-
bable alternative, and suppose that on the question
" That the words proposed to be left out stand
part of the question" the "Noes" have it—that is,
that the House decides that all the words after
" that" shall be omitted. The first effect of this
will be to negative the question, " That the Bill
be now read a Second Time," leaving it still
open to the supporters of the bill, if they think
proper, to renew the motion on another day. The
next question is, that the words of Lord John
Russell's resolution be inserted ; but before this is
put to the vote it is competent to move amend-
ments upon the resolution, each of which will be
put to the house in the same form as the resolution
itself, the question being in each case, shall " the
words proposed to be left out stand part of the
question ?" When these amendments to the amend-
Ment have been disposed of, the house decides upon
the insertion of the resolution. If the " Ayes"
have it the resolution is carried; if the "Noes,"
the proceeding is wholly abortive, nothing being
left of the original question except the word " that.'
and Government being at liberty to bring forward
their bill for the second reading on any future day.
We trust we have furnished our non-Parliamen-
tary readers with an intelligible explanation, by
reference to which they will be able to understand
and solve for themselves whatever complications
may arise in dealing with a plain question ren-
dered needlessly intricate by the form of the amend-
ment. It seems, indeed, fated that great party
conflicts shall be fought out on motions which are
scarcely according to the forms of the house. The
resolution of Mr. 'Milner Gibson last year trenched
on the very verge of irregularity, and Lord Pal-
merston overthrew the Government of Lord John
Russell in 1852 by an amendment to the title
of a bill, which, as the bill had not yet passed
through committee, where the title of a bill
is for the first time settled, ought not,
it is generally believed, to have been put
from the chair at all. The truth seems to be,
that in these great party contests their full signi-
ficance is seldom expressed in the words of the ques-
tion, but lies rather in the conventional meaning
which both sides may choose to give it. Thus, Lord
Stanley has already informed us that this Resolu-
tion will be treated by Government as equivalent to
the rejection of the bill, and, somewhat exaggera-
ting the license of arbitrary construction assumed
by Governments under such circumstances, has not
indistinctly intimated that it will have the effect
of a vote of censure. The difference is between
"biting your thumb in the abstract, and biting your
thumb at me," and Government claims to be the
judge of the intention. We presume that no one
will quarrel with them for applying to themselves
a censure, though none is to be found in the formal
words of the Resolution.

(From the Morning Advertiser)
We repudiate and denounce, as an affront to the
intelligence and independence of the friends of the
Ballot Society in the House of Commons, the inti-
mation which has been conveyed to us, that, owing
to the agencies brought to bear upon them by the
sham of an association called the Ballot Society, a
goodly number of Liberals will be deterred from
supporting Mr. Wyld's resolution, asserting the
unjust and unsatisfactory nature of any Reform
Bill which does not provide for the exercise of
the elective franchise by the Ballot. If there
be any such Liberals, we beg to warn them
in time of the great. most probably irretrievable
error, which they contemplate committing. Mr.
Wyld is adopting the right course. Since Lord
John Russell is determined to purchase office on
any terms, the Liberals are bound to make the best,
terms they can for the country. If he will be
Premier, then let him pay the price of that position
of power and importance. Now is the time to
bring the pressure to bear on him. If the noble
lord finds that he must eat tie leek of the Ballot, he
will do it, rather than be excluded from Downing-
street. _

So great is the importance which we attach to
the. Ballot, that, if Lord John will but commit him-
self to that mode of voting, we shall, notwith-
standing the very poor opinion we entertain of
him, give him our support. &pledge to carry the
question of the Ballot would, in our eyes, cover a
multitude of sins. The independent Liberals are at
this moment, if ther
only knew it, masters of the
situation. They can, if they will, bring Lord John
Russell to book. Let them but determine that
they will not only give him no support until
he commits himself to the Ballot, but that
they will oppose him as often as opportuni-
ties for doing so conscientiously offer, and Lord
John, in the event of his accession to office, will
become, at least in profession if not in practice, one
of the most earnest supporters of the Ballot.
Now, therefore, is the time for the independent
Liberals to act in concert. Mr. Wyld furnishes
them with that opportunity,: let them gladly and
gratefully embrace it. It maybe long before there
is another such fasourable conjunction of circum-
stances. The majority of those Liberals who fail
to support Mr. Wvld on this occasion will, if we
be not greatly mistaken, have cause to rue the day
that they deserted the cause of the Ballot. The
Liberal who does not turn the present opportuni-
ties to account, is altogether undeserving of popular
support. We shall scan, with scrutinising eye,
and so will the country, the division list of the
majority and minority on Mr. Wyld's motion. Our
advice to the hon. member for Bodmin is, to perse-
vere with his resolution to commit the house to the
vote by Ballot, even should he not be able to muster
a dozen supporters.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS—(YESTERDAY).
The LORD CIiANCELLOB, took his seat on the woolsack
at five o'clock.

NEW PEER.
Lord THURLOE took the oaths and his seat on acceding
to the title.
Lord PORTMAN 'presented a petition praying for an
alteration of the beer laws.

INDIA.
The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH gave notice that to-
morrow he should move for certain papers connected with
India, from the year 1857 down to the present period, and
also that he should call attention to the state of the money
market.