The Sun.
London, England, 1861-03-13 00:00:00

Seven ran.

GRAND NATIONAL STEEPLECHASE.
Jealousy
The Dane
Old Ben Roe
Bridegroom
Twenty four ran. Won by two lengths; two lengths
between second and third.

... 2

£4O HANDICAP PLATE.
Hartley Wintney
Polly Peachurn
Queen 8ee....

After a dead heat.

I tiIPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS—(Turs DAY.)

The SPEAKER took the chair shortly after twelve o'clock,
NAVY (WOODEN SHIPS).
_ _

Mr. CORRY obtained a return specifying the names of

the wooden ships intended to carry guns on more than one
deck now building, and showing in Bths the state of pro-
gress of each ship towards completion.
COUNTY FRANCHISE BILL. _ .

➢lr. LOCKE KING moved the second reading of this
bill. He said, as the principle of the bill had frequently
been approved by that house, he need not repeat the argu-
ments which had been adduced in its favour; but he had
to regret that hon. gentlemen who opposed him did not
resort to direct means for throwing it out, but took indirect
measures, which he did not think creditable to the house.
The hon. gentleman met some objections which have been
urged against the bill, and came to the conclusion that
there were no real force in them. He strongly urged upon
the Government the necessity of priceeding without delay
with some practical measure of reform.

Mr. A. SMITH moved as an amendment "The previous
question." He thought they could not look to the measure
by itself, but must regard the inevitable consequences which
would flow from it. If they proposed this bill it would be
impossible to retain those differences which ought to exist
between county and town constituencies. He considered
that the hon. member for Birmingham had done much to
retard the progress of reform by his ceaseless agitation.
Although that hon. gentleman perseveringly smoked the
pipe of peace, he raised such a cloud of smoke as to lead to
the supposition that there was something like incendiarism
at the bottom of it.
Mr. DU CANE considered that the motion of the hon.
member for East Surrey was extremely inopportune at the
present moment, and he therefore seconded the amend-
ment. The question had been fairly discussed in two suc-
cessive Parliaments, at.d under the auspices of two adminis-
trations, and he had no hesitation in saying that, throughout
the country there was a perfect indifference on the matter.
Lord HENLEY objected to the bill, because, while it
created a vast number of additional county electors, it made
no provision for diminishing the expenses of county elec-
tions, which were at present enormous and scandalous. In
Northamptonshire the expenses of conveying voters in one
year, from February, 1858, to February, 1859, were £lO,OOO,
or very close upon it. He would take the case of Colches-
ter. In that county there was a farm of 1,000 acres,
which was let out to at least fifty tenants. Now,
the proprietor of this ground might, by means of the
.-he number of small voters would be able to swamp the
whole constituency.
Mr. ADDERL EY said, he did not consider the hon.
member (Mr. L. King) had any ground for congratulation
on the description of support which he had received from
hon. members. The hon. member seemed to consider that
there was a virtue in a £lO occupancy, but he denied
that he had advanced any proper basis for his
measure. He denied that the county constituency was
corrupt, or that it exhibited any want of independence, so
as to justify a. bill of this description. The case for the bill
rested on an isolated instance, and it was not of general appli-
cation. The fact was, that constitutionally the county con-
stituency was not placed in a proper position, and ke re-
ferred to Staffordshire, where the electors connected with
the potteries overwhelmed the other constituency, and to
Birmingham, where the 40s. electors formed a considerable
number. He, therefore, felt bound to oppose the second
reading.
Mr. BRISTOW expressed his surprise that any opposi-
tion could be offered towards ,this, bilk by t.liottitwhit called
'themselves reformers. He thought hon. ,members were
mistaken atfout th 4 feeilitg of the fetidly, if-thet supposed
there was any sentiment of indifference pervading the com-
munity in reference to the question of Reform. (Hear,
hear.) Notwithstanding that reformers had been twitted
with the absence of indignatirn meetings, he could assure
hon. members that in the Midland Counties where greater
interest was felt on the question than in metropolitan
boroughs, constituencies were watching with anxiety the
progress of this bill, in order to see how members who were
sent to Parliament pledged to support reform, and ministers
would act in reference to the measure, as indices of what
what they might expect from their representatives and Go-
vernment. He supported the bill not only on its intrinsic
merits, but on extrinsic grounds, for it had a peculiar im-
portance at the present time with the people of England.
He trusted, therefore, that the bill would be carried by a
large majority of independent members, and that Govern-
ment would show, not only by their conduct in regard to
the present question, but in future with regard to the
subject of reform, that they were anxious to have the question
settled. Ho believed that this alone would be the means of
averting that storm of popular indignation, which might be
expected to break forth by a further delay of the question,
notwithstanding the patient and reasonable character of the
people of this country. (Hear, hear.)
Sir L. PALK strongly deprecated the attempts made by
hon. members in respect to the question of reform, by en-
deavouring to effect a defeat which they could not accom-
plish by acomprehensive measure which Parliament had
already rejected. He denied that there was any popular
feeling in favour of this bill, which was shown by the fact
that the hon. member for Surrey had to re• introduce it
from session to session. He believed that eventually a com-
prehensive measure would be required, but he did not think
the time had arrived. He considered that the effect of this
bill would be to throw increased political power into the
hands of the commercial classes, and it would be most dan-
gerous to pass any bill of such a nature without accompany-
ing it with safeguards. He concluded by moving as an
amendment the previous question.
Lord ENFIELD said he felt bound to support the bill.
_ _

It had been objected to the measure that the 'amount en-
titling to the franchise was too low, but he believed that
no one was pledged to any amount, and as far as he was
concerned he reserved to himself a perfect right to deal with
the bill in committee. With regard to the argument about
the rejection of large measures of reform by the house as
being a reason for not introducing a measure of detail, he
contended that Reform was more likely to be carried out
by means of the latter. Reformers might endeavour to carry
out their views in reference to the county franchise by pas-
sing this bill, and next session they might deal with the
question of the borough franchise. (Hear, hear, and oh,
oh.) Considering the pledges he had given to his consti-
tuency, and the promises of the house to deal with the sub-
ject of Reform, he thought he was called on to support this
bill.
Mr. HUNT said the object of the bill was to introduce
into county constituencies a town element of franchise
which operates most unjustly. He thought it might be
desirable to make an alteration in the county franchise,
which he would not object to see lowered to £2O, provided
it was attended with safeguards.
Mr. CONINGHAM considered that bringing forward a
measure of this description was only trifling with the great
subject of reform, and bringing the Liberal party into con-
tempt with the country. Members who advocated the mea-
sure must know that with the opposition of the Govern-
ment and of members on the Opposition benches they could
not expect to carry the bill. He was a sincere Reformer,
and denounced measures like the present as the result of a
sham and hypocritical feeling on the part of pretended
Reformers. However, he did not intend to vote against
the bill—(laughter)—for he would not wish it to be under-
stood that he was opposed to the £lO franchise, but he
would not vote in its favour.

Mr. A. EGERTON opposed the bill, but considering
himself pledged to reform, he would support a compre-
hensive measure, including a £25 franchise.
Sir G. C. LEWIS said that it had been observed that

there were three modes of dealing with the question of re •
form. In the first place, the Government might introduce
a comprehensive measure, or, as in the present instance, it
might be dealt with in detail by private members. The
Government came to the conclusion that after the experi-
ence if 19st session, it would not be advisable to introduce
a similar bill on the subject of Parliamentary Reform to
that of last year. He concurred in the wisdom of that de-
cision, and was a party to it, and his opinion was unaltered
He thought that the wisdom of that decision had been con-
firmed by the vote of the house on the first night
of the session and the feeling of the country.
On the occasion alluded to there was a reso-
lution. proposed pledging the house that it was their
opinion the Government ought to introduce a comprehen-
sive measure of Parliamentary Reform, and it was nega-
tived, there being only 46 in its favour, while against it
there were 129. The principle clearly affirmed by that
vote was that it was not desirable for her Majesty's Govern-
ment to introduce this session any bill on Reform. Nothing
had since occurred to call for any alteration in the course
the Government had pursued. With regard to the two
measures, the present and the one relating to the borough
franchise, which proposed to deal with piequestmn,
of the country. But they were
they would effect a considerable alteration inlio them constitu-
encieseasutesof
produced simul-
ofexistthede
different members, and
.were
taneously, and mat difficulltiens
in dealing with them. illnuesctreasstaiornily
he referred to the bill which he intro uce for the transfer
feeling of indifference towards. nthedquedstion of reform,
Some years ago that transfer would have
of four seats.
been considered a mater of considerable importance, but
the manner in which it had been treated did not show that
there was any strong feeling on the question at present. He
was desirous of seeing reform carried out in detail, but in
his opinion the time had not arrived for discussing the sub-
ject. However, there was nothing to prevent gentlemen
from voting for the second reading of the bill on the ground
of the £lO franchise, for the measure could be altered in
committee, and he himself would vote for the second read-
ing. (Hear. hear, and laughter.)
Mr. BARROW opposed the bill on the ground that it
would smamp the 40s. freeholders.
Mr. OSBORNE complained strongly of the conduct of
some of the reform members, which left the question of
reform in a state of confusion, and was increased by the
speech of the right hon. gentleman (Sir G. C. Lewis). He
thought his hon. friend the member :for Surrey had been
trusted in respect to his measure like a too confiding young
lady. He (Mr. L. King) had received a promise of mar-
riage from the right hon. gentleman in his youth, but he
had been abandoned in his sear and yellowleaf—(laughter)
—and ultimately he found himself turned into the streets
of the metropolis. (Great laughter.) This question of Re-
form, which had been one of the great stalking holies, had