The Sun.
London, England, 1859-03-01 00:00:00

within a Parliamentary borough, but not resident within
the borough, would have the same right of voting for the
borough as if he were resident. There was also a third
point on which he wished to receive some information from
the right hon. gentleman—namely, how he proposed to deal
with the case of a person who held two properties within a
Parliamentary, borough, one of which at present entitled
him to a vote for that bdrough, and the second of which
enabled him to vote for the county ?
• Lord DUNCAN said he was desirous of ascertaining
from the Lord Advocate when the Government intended
to introduce a bill for the purpose of amending the repre-
sentation of Scotland.
Mr. BLACKBURN thought the discussion had been
considerably complicated by the amendment which the hon.
member for Montrose had proposed, and expressed a hope
that the hon. gentleman would withdraw it until some more
fitting opportunity.
Colonel SYKES said he deeply regretted the Chancellor
of the Exchequer should have thought proper to exclude
Scotland from the operation of his bill, inasmuch as he
could not help regarding it as unwise and impolitic to take
a course which might tend to destroy that general commu-
nity of feeling and interest between one portion of the king-
dom and another which it was so desirable to promote.
The right hon. gentleman had not done well in making
Scotland an alien.

Mr. KINNAIRD joined in this appeal to the hon. mem-
ber for Montrose to withdraw his amendment.

Mr. VANCE thought it would be impossible to mix up,
as had been suggested, the representative system of the
United Kingdom in one general scheme.
Mr. CLAY trusted the hon. membor for Montrose would
not press his amendment to a division. He wished to ask
the right hon. gentleman whether any calculation had
been made of the number of voters who would be ad-
mitted to the franchise under the different qualifications
which had been described. It was proposed that in
counties the cost of polling places and other expenses
should be borne by the county rate, and this was a very
admirable provision. (Hear.) But was there not to be a
similar provision in boroughs ? (Hear.) Surely what was
proper in the one case was equally proper in the other. It
might be urged that these expenses were much less in
boroughs than in counties, but he could only say that at one
uncontested election he paid more than £4lO for the ex-
penses of the sheriff, hustings, polling clerks, and so on.
Mr. BAXTER said that in consequence of the appeal
made to him from both sides of the house he should with-
draw his motion. (Hear, hear.)
After a few remarks rom Sir H. Willoughby and Mr.
C. Brace,
Mr. CRATTORD protested against the cavalier treat-
ment which Scotland had experienced this evening, and was
surprised at the insolent silence which had been preserved
respecting the Scotch representation.
Mr. STEUART said that, taking popnlation into account,
the counties in Scotland were more inadequately repre-
sented than the boroughs. He wished to bring under the
notice of the Lord Advocate the right of the Scotch uni-
veisities to return members. (Hear, hear.)
Sir J. OGILVY was surprised that the right hon. gen-
tleman had made no reference to Scotland and. to Ireland in
his statement, having distinctly understood from what took
place on a previous evening that it was his intention to
do so.
The LORD ADVOCATE said he had refrained from
answering the appeals which had been made to him, not
with any idea of showing disrespect to the house, but
simply in order that he might have an opportunity of re-
plying at once to all the questions which were addressed to
him. He did not think the house would expect him to
enter at present into any'discussion of the Reform Bill for
Scotland. ; but he assured the hon. member for Montrose
(Mr. Baxter) that it was the intention of the Government
to introduce such a measure, and that it would be based
on the general principles which had been announced as
applicable to England. (Hear, hear.) Everybody knew
that the laws and institutions of Scotland differed in a cer-
tain degree from those of England, and therefore there
must be a difference in details ; but the leading features of
the two bills weuld be the same. With reference to this
subject, he hoped Scotch members would not assume, from
anything which had passed this evening, that there was to
be no increase of representation for Scotland. (Hear, hear.)
He could only say, on behalf of the Government, that they
would endeavour to do justice to Scotland; but if Scotland
was not fairly treated, he certainly knew no country more
capable of asserting her claims to justice. (Hear, hear, and
a laugh.)
Mr. JOHN LOCKE, as a member for one of the large
constituencies which had not been treated with very great
deference by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, expressed
his opinion that those constituencies would not think them-
selves fairly treated by this bill when they found in it no
provision for the extension of the suffrage in boroughs.
The right hon. gentleman had dealt with this question en-
tirely as if it affected counties only; and while he had ex-
tended the franchise in counties he proposed to introduce
into the borough constituencies an element which would
entirely alter their present character, and render them much
more liable to landed and aristocratic influence.
Mr. NEWDEGATE admitted the claims of Scotland to
an extended representation, both on the grounds of pro-
per.
ty and population but contended that this claim was in-
fenor to that of the English counties.
Mr. W. J. FOX, while agreeing in two principles laid
down by the Chancellor of the Exchequer—that all interests
should be represented, and that the defects of the Reform
Act of 1832 should, as far as possible, be remedied—entered
his protest against this bill as not carrying out either of
them. (Hear, hear.) It did not provide for the emancipa-
tion of the working classes, which was one great deficiency
of the Reform Act of 1832. There was no reason why Par-
liament should be afraid to trust the working classes. The
Chancellor of the Exchequer had very justly observed, that
a man who lived in a £lO house in a county was just as
likely to be a loyal subject and to exercise the franchise pro-
perly as a man who lived in a £2O or a £5O house, and so
in a town a £5 householder or a £2 householder was just as
likely to be a trustworthy voter as a £lO householder. (Hear.)
Lord J. RUSSELL said—l am quite ready to admit that
the Government could not propose a bill on the subject of
the representation of the people without great difficulty. I
am quite willing to admit, also, that it is very difficult for
those who hear a plan proposed for the first time to judge
of its details until they have had some little time to con-
sider them. But there are two points of the right hon. gen-
tleman's statement upon which I have long thought, upon
which I require no time to make up my mind, and upon
which the right hon. gentleman's statement has, I own,
filled me with very great apprehensions. The first of these
points is what he stated with regard to freeholders who have
now the right of voting for counties. (Hear, hear.) If I
understood the right hon. gentleman, these freeholders are
no longer to vote for the county, but are to be deprived of
that right, or are to be given, instead, that which they may
or may not value—viz., the privilege of voting for the
borough in which they may reside. Now, sir, as it appears
to me, this is a very great and perilous innovation. (Hear,
hear.) This provides for the extinction of a right of voting
belonging to a number of from 90,000 to 100,000 persons
who have enjoyed that right during a period of 400 years.
(Hear, hear.) It is proposed, without any consent of theirs,
without any inquiry, to deprive them of that right of voting
by a summary Act of Parliament. (Hear, hear.) But, sir,
further than that, so far from considering this as one of the
defects of the present representation which required a
remedy, it has always appeared to me a very great advan-
tage. (Cheers.) That there should be a mixture of the
towns and counties ; that there should be not only the
landed gentry, with their tenants and the workpeople de-
pendent on them who may have small freeholds, voting for
counties, but that there should be persons engaged in trade
in towns who should come among the great body of free-
holders in order to choose persons to represent the whole
community—has always appeared to me one of the benefits
of the present system of representation. This is not an
opinion formed yesterday or to-day, because at the time of
the Reform Act, when certain peers were willing to
subscribe to the Reform Act on certain conditions, and one
of those conditions was that freeholders who lived in towns
should henceforth be confined to towns, I declared plainly.
to Lord Grey that if the bill came back with that amend-
ment I would propose the rejection of that amendment,
and would risk the whole fate of the Reform Bill on that
sole amendment. (Cheers.) With regard to many of these
persons the act will be one of entire disfranchisement, be-
cause, as the law stands at present, if a man lives in a £lO
house as occupier he has a right to vote for the town al-
ready, and if he has, besides, a property of 40s. freehold in
the county, he has a right to vote also for the county. In all
those cases you would deprive him of the right of voting
for the county, and give him no compensation whatever.
(Cheers.) Now, I cannot but think that when this propo-
sition goes forth to the country, with regard to a great por-
tion of those 90,000 or 100,000 persons there will be great
alarm 'produced. For my own part, when I have thought
over the Reform Act and the present state of the represen-
tation, which a wise Legislature would propose to amend, it
has never occurred to me that this was other than one of
the present advantages and benefits, instead of a defect to
be remedied. (Cheers.) That is one part of the proposition
of the right hon. gentleman which I say gives me great ap-
prehension ; and, supposing the right hon. gentleman shoUld
succeed in stifling the discontent of these persons, suppos-
ing he should succeed in severing the towns from the coun-
ties in the way he proposes, supposing he attaches the
1 counties more to the land and divides the towns from them,
what effect will be 'produced but ill-blood between towns
and counties—a greater discontent in the towns with regard
to the proceedings of those who are owners of land, and a
greater division of opinion among those who are occupied in
agriculture and those who are engaged in trade ? (Hear.)
There is another part of the right hon. gentleman's state-
ment, which is not a proposition but an omission, which
appears to me to be of a very serious character. Ever since
the time when I departed from that proposition of finality
which Lord Grey and Lord Althorp always insisted upon,
I have done so upon this ground, which appeared to me to
be the only ground for disturbing the settlement of so vast
and complicated a subject—viz., that there was a great body
of persons, and those persons belonging to the working
classes of the country, who were very competent to exer-
cise the franchise. With regard to all those persons
the right hon. gentleman does httle or nothing. (Cheers.)
He has arrived only so far as I arrived in the year 1837,
namely, that persons who had money in savings' banks
should be allowed a franchise. Really, if contentment is to
be given, if it is intended that a bill of this kind shall give
satisfaction to the country, I should say that there is a great
portion of the community fully satisfied with the law as it
stands, but there is another portion of the community not
satisfied, and that is the great body of the working men.
(Hear, hear) They take more and more interest in political
concerns, they are becoming more and more qualified to
judge, they have by all your changes—by your reduction
of duties—by enabling them to get food cheaper—by enab-
ling them to get their news and disquisitions cheaper—be-
come more fit to exercise the political franchise ; and, feel-
ing politically fit, are dissatisfied that they should any
longer be excluded from that privilege. (Cheers.) Be-
sides, the right hon. gentleman stated, and very truly,
that at different periods bills have been broight in by the
Government to confer a rating franchise. By one bill it
was proposed to confer the franchise on those who paid
praatiedsxt6o
in.the rataems.ounTcloofseXsbil,
lasnhclavbey
naantuotry oranistedhosexe
pewhco_
ethiatskin
tations. (Cheers.) That they contained exact de bons
of the franchise I by no means wish to contend, bill I do
to the that
iftry a ,btihileogrfsatisfaction
bodyd o isf
theth give w o r k ianngy people,
com-
prising some hundreds of thousands, ought to be admitted
to the franchise, and that the constitution will be the
stronger by their admission. (Loud cheers.) I think
you deprive yourselves of that additional strength
while you continue their exclusion. Well, these two
points in the statement of the right hon. gentleman give
me great dissatisfaction. With regard to any other ques-
tion in the bill—the amount of the seats that arc disposed