The Sun.
London, England, 1861-04-24 00:00:00

lONIAN ISLANDS.

Mr. MAGUIRE gave notice that on that day fortnight
he would move for a return of all papers relative to the
appointment of Mr. W. E. Gladstone as Commissioner
Extraordinary to the lonian Islands.
CATTLE SHOW.

Sir J. PAXTON asked the First Commissioner of
Works, if there were any truth in the report, that the Royal
Agricultural Society are about to hold a Cattle Show in
Hyde-park ; and if so to explain the reason why the Goa
vernment have consented thereto.
Mr. COWPER said it was intended to hold the Cattle
Show, but the exact site where it was to take place was not
decided on.

ROAD ACROSS HYDE-PARK.
Earl GROSVENOR asked the First Commissioner of
Works whether he had any plan for making a road across
Hyde-park to connect Paddington with Brompton; and, if
so, whether there was any intention of carrying it out ?,
Mr. COWPER said he was aware of the great advan-
tage that would result from the communication in question,
but he was sure his noble friend (Earl Grosvenor) would
agree with him that it would be unadvisable to introduce
. -

any traffic that would interfere with the purpose of the
recreation for which the parks were established. A bill had
been introduced by the Metropolitan Railway Company for
the object of having an underground communication through
Hyde Park, which he considered would have been very de-
sirable, but this bill was not proceeded with, and he re-
peated that it would be unadvisable to interfere with the
recreation of the people in the public parks. (Hear, hear.)
PUBLIC SCHOOLS.
Mr. G. DUFF asked the Secretary of State for the Home
Department whether it was the intention of the Govern-
ment to grant an inquiry into the state, discipline, studies,
and revenues of the schools, commonly called public schools,
as well as of those endowed schools in which the Latin and
Greek languages are taught ; and whether he would object
to state generally what steps the Government meant to
take in the matter?

Sir G. C. LEWIS said that Parliament had already re-
cognised a difference between places of education which
enjoyed the benefit of foundations and those private schools
which were unendowed. Accordingly there had been in-
quiries into the condition of the universities of Oxford and
Cambridge, and other foundations which were placed under
the control of the Charity Commissioners. With reference
to the schools to which the hon. member (Mr Duff) alluded,
the Government considered that they should be brought
under the inspection of the State: Some difference of
opinion, however, existed as to the manner in which such
inquiry should be conducted, whether byßoyal commission
or otherwise. He thought it desirable, as a preliminary, to
communicate with the principals of these establishments,
which would render the proceedings more amicable in their
character.

Sir W. HEATHCOTE inquired whether, after whal
had already taken place in respect to Government inquiries,
Winehebter College would not be exempted from the pro-
posed investigation?

Sir G. C. LEWIS said that the preliminary object of the
communication to which he had referred was to ascertain
whht educational establishments might properly be ex-
empted from such inquiry.
STATUE OF SIR HENRY HAVELOCK IN
TRAFALGAR-SQUARE.
In reply to Mr. C. BENTINCK,

Mr. CONFER said that he was happy to inform the
lion. member that the consent of the First Commissioner of
Works had been obtained in 1857. He (Mr. Cowper) ob
lotted to the extreme height of the pedestal, which
Lloted the statue in a position in which it could not be seen,
4as diminishing in appearance the National Gallery,
which was already too low.
INDIAN FAMINE.
India whet
Mr.
11' BAILLIE asked the Secretary of State for
her
Governmenty prious steps had been taken by the
at lanndia with a view to meeting the distress
arising
Sir C. from the expected famine ?
WOOD im
more than a general.ud• that he was not in a position to give
of the Indian Gover ans
entwer to the qUestion. The atteLtion
nm had been drawn to this subject,
h
and they had taken steps
to rael
but he could not give the hen member . the
ancalaty in India,
mi
recise informa-
tion as to the mode which the-IndianGovernment had
adopted.

T lit BALIco:
Mr. 11. BERK ELEY moved •
' Pursilaut to • •
leave to bring in a bill for the protect' his notice, for
would
ars to serve
Parliament
them
Great Britain and Ireland, in voting forl°ran of electors, in I
in Parliament'. The elections in whichke
protected were those of the members of
were to make laws for the protection of life and property,
who
and to hold the purse-strings of the nation in their hands.
The voters could not, under existing circumstances, fri,l%dels;
exercise their right in those elections, until they 0bt41,...f„
law which would enable them to do it privily. The bill he

r asked leave to introduce was one to prevent the intimidation
of electors, and one that would also tend to check the prac-
tices of bribery and treating, while it would place the
strongest impediment in the way of the false personation of
voters. Now he could see no validity in the argument which
he had heard, that there was some mysterious influence in
the year 1861 which should prevent any member of that
house from bringing forward a question of electoral reform.
He saw that extensive reforms of many other kinds were
urged forward in this very year. There were large mea-
sures of legal reform going on ; there were hen. and gallant
members contending for a reform of military affairs ; the
Admiralty was now crumbling under the attacks of those
reformers, who combined so much knowledge with so much
ignorance ; and the civil service, and the diplomatic service,
had their turn ; why then should electoral reform be tabooed
this year ? He could only suppose it might be convenient
to some hon. gentlemen and noble lords, as well as to the
Government, to let the subject lie by. The noble lord, a
leading member of the Government, in 1860 brought in a
reform bill, on the ground that because the country was I
quiet, and because there were not 100,000 men at Birming-
ham threatening a march on London, it was a good time to
settle the question. But this year it was alleged by the
noble lord, as his reason for not bringing in a reform bill,
that there was no excitement or agitation in the country to
demand it ; the noble lord said this year, " I have a shop
full of reform at the service of the country, but it seems the
country does not want reform, or it would be knock-
ing at my doors and breaking my windows to get it." He
' knew perfectly well that in the present temper of the house
it was perfectly useless to hope for the success of his motion,
but he did not believe it useless to bring it forward with re-
gard to the question of reform and the feeling of the coun-
try. Yet the fact could not be denied that 160 constitu-
encies of the country asked for the protection of the ballot,
and that of those constituencies there were 38 numbering
more than 10,000 electors. Amongst the constituencies
which he had enumerated was London; and it was remark-
able that of all the members of the metropolitan boroughs
the noble lord was the only one who refused to give the pro-
tection of the ballot to the electors. (Hear, hear.) If it
were not for the noble lord's high talents, if it were not that
the country felt it owed him a debt of gratitude for giving
it the largest measure of reform it ever got, if it were not
that the people had confidence in his management of
foreign affairs he ivould not hold his place as a member of
the Government. The question of the ballot had been so
often and so completely sifted, the attempts to answer the
arguments in its favour had been so futile and so beside the
question, that he should not on the present occasion enter
into the theory of secret voting. Yet he knew how dan-
gerous it was for him to take that course, because if he left
any part of the subject unguarded, he was aware that ad-
vantage would be taken of that circumstance ; various
dodges would be resorted to for some kind of answer, and it
would be said he had given up this or that part of the ques •
tion. There was before them that expert wrestler the noble
lord the member for Tiverton, fresh from his triumph at
Tiverton,and from dragging the unhappy Rowcliffe at the
wheels of his chariot—(laughter)—and if he left any part of
the subject unguarded he knew that he would find himself
straightforward on his back, with the Parliamentary knees
of the noble lord well into thepit of his stomach. (Laughter.)
If the noble lords opposite applied themselves seriously to the
question and attempted to put down intimidation and bri-
bery he might pause in his endeavour, but nothing of the
sort had been done. There was, indeed, the Corrupt Prac-
tices Prevention Act, but that measure was turned into con-
tempt by every pettyfogging attorney in the country, That
same measure was submitted last year to another committee,
under the particular care of the late member for Marylebone.
He thought he might have been appointed a member of
that committee, but he made no complaint on that head.
That committee carried on some flirtation with the ballot,
and he would read to the house the questions which had been
put and the answers which the witnesses had given to those
questions. The hon. gentleman then quoted the evidence of
Mr. Vaughan, Mr. Sergeant Pigott, Mr. Phinn, Mr. Rose,
Mr. Childers, M.P., who said that " the ballot had given
undoubted and universal satisfaction in Australia," and
Capt. Clarke, who corroborated the opinion of Mr. Childers.
Mr.Wyld, the Conservative agent at Norwich, said that he
was not an advocate of the ballot, but he was an advocate
for a secret system of voting. The hon. gentleman also
quoted the evidence of the late Mr. Coppock, who said that
if the ballot existed his vocation would be gone. After the
evidence which was given before that committee he did not
know why a recommendation of the ballot did not form
part of the report of that committee. He should now read
to the house an historical and analytical account of the
elections for Cirencester since 1848, which was vouched for
by Mr. Wakefield and Mr. Cooke, of Cirencester. The in-
fluence of Earl Bathurst was supposed to be paramount in
that borough. In 1848 the Hon. C. Ponsonby, the present
Lord de Manley, stood for the borough on liberal principles;
but he was defeated, and nothing followed. In 1852 the
Hon. A. Ponsonby stood on Liberal principles, and was
successful, having beaten Earl Bathurst's nominee, upon
which notices to quit followed. In 1857 the liberals were
beaten, and there was no result ; but in 1852 the Tories
were beaten, andmore notices to quit followed that election.
Persons who had been 30 and 40 years tenants to Earl
Bathurst, but who voted for the Liberal candidate, were
served with notices to quit. The hon. gentleman read ex-
tracts giving the names of various voters who had received
notices to quit their holdings because they would not vote
for the candidates supported by their landlords. All the
house could do, he said, was, that as they could not get at
the exact evidence in those cases, they must look at the
circumstantial evidence. Now, he would turn to intimi-
dation in the Principality of Wales. A letter had been
addressed by the Rev. M. Jones, of Bala, Merioneth-
shire, to the secretary of the Ballot Society, stating
that the people of Merionethshire had been made to
feel the necessity of secret voting. After a passing allusion
to the conduct of the late Mr. Pryce, in turning tenants
out of their farms because they would not vote in accord-
ance with the wishes of their landlords, the hon. gentleman
said he now came to an accusation which had been made
against an hon. baronet, a member of that house, whom he
knew to be as honourable and amiable a man as any in the
house—Sir W. Wynn—to the effect that he had raised the
rents of eleven of his tenants who had voted against the
candidate of his choice. He would next come to Pembroke-
shire, where the candidates were Sir John 0 wen and Col.
Owen. The former gentleman was returned ; but when the
poll was declared at Haverfordwest, Colonel Owen, in the
course of his speech, said, " He would say a few words to
the landlords, and there were a good many present, who
had used their influence very unfairly against him. Men
were driven to the poll like sheep, and it was notorious
that many of them, after coming out of the polling booth,
were heard to say they were sorry they had been obliged to
vote against him. He had not yet said one word for or
against the ballot, but it is you who will bring it on." In-
stead of looking upon the volunteer movement as adverse to
the cause of the ballot, he advocated that movement in
the strongest manner. When the Great Exhibition took

place, and when all the world was trembling for fear that
something should happen through the multitudes of people
who flocked to it, he said, " Observe the order, the loyalty,
the steadiness of the English people," and as a test of that
he observed the conduct of those who came t..) the palace on
the shilling days and those who came on the five shilling
days. He remarked it as an extraordinary thing that those
who came to the palace on the five shilling days bestowed all
their attention on works of fashion, while the working
classes, on the shilling days, confined all their attention to
works of science. (Hear, hear.) So with regard to the vo-
lunteers—those men were ready to meet death if necessary,•
and they laid a heavy tax on themselves—for it was a heavy
tax—for the service of the country. (Hear.) Could not the
house, if it trusted those men with the rifle, trust them also
with a vote ? And yet that was exactly the class of men from
whom they took away thevote—the shopocracy of the coun-
try, who were more under the power of their customers than
any other class, except the agricultural class, who were go
much under the power of their landlords. He appealed
then to the house in their behalf ; but he knew he might just
as well appeal to the floor of the house; and in conclusion—
(ironical cheers from the Opposition)—he should ask the
house to allow him to bring in this bill. It was a bill
which was not understood—(a laugh)—and the house would
take special care that they would not understand it. They
would not let it be read a first time, they would not have it
printed, and although it was supported by so many large
constituencies, the house did not extend to it the courtesy
which they showed to bills of not half its importance.
(Hear, hear.) His honourable and learned friend the
member for Cambridge University (Mr. Walpole), the right
hon. baronet the member for Morpeth (Sir G. Grey), and
Mr. S. Wortley, who had been a member of that house, did
not understand it. What did those gentlemen believe ?
They believed that the Ballot Bill meant nothing but that
there should be a box with red and black balls, which each
elector dropped into the box and then the election was
finished. Could anything be more ridiculous than that?
and if hon. and distinguished men such as he had named
fell into such errors, why, he asked, would not the house
read this bill ? (Hear, hear.) He knew that a very inti-
mate communication existed between the Treasury bench
and Printing-house-square ; and that certain hon. gentle-
men, who would scorn to give protection to the voter at the
polling-booth, did not hesitate to take the responsibility of
defending a political right. If there was such on
the Treasury bench it reflected no credit on that bench, for
it was not honest for a member to hear a speech, and then,
instead of opposing it, to sneak away into a hack place and
write an article against it. (Hear, hear.) If there were
any such on the Treasury bench he thought the Govern •
ment ought to get rid of them, for they were no credit to
them. (A laugh.) He would now leave this question
in the hand's of the house, asking them to do justice to
the electors, though he knew he might as well appeal to the
Pope as to that house on this question. (Laughter.) The
hon. geu Ceti:lan concluded by moving the first reading of
this bill.

Sir C. DOUGLAS seconded the motion. It was 19 or 20
years since he gave a vote in that house against the ballot,
and something like 10 years since ho gave a vote in favour
of it. (Hear, and a laugh.) He had changed his opinion,
because his reason convinced him that he ought to change
it. (Hear.) It appeared to him that every man had a right
to the franchise as a trust which he could not sell, because
he could not allow any other man to act upon it. But be
it a right, or be it a trust, he thought all men on both sides
of the house were agreed that it was an immoral act to sell
it or
to attempt to influence it, (Hear, hear.) lie did not

mean in the least degree to insinuate anything against any
hon. gentleman in naming him in connection with some of
the places where undue influence prevailed. In Dod's book
on " Electoral Facts," under the head of " Influence," he
found that at Bridgenorth it was possessed by the Whit-
more family, a member of which had sat in that house since
the time of James. I. The influence at Calne had be-
longed to the Marquis of Lansdowne since the year 1762,
and that at Huntingdon had been in the family of the Mon-
tagues since the Restoration. There were numerous other
places to which he might refer. (Cries of " Warwick.")
It was not his wish to refer to Warwick, though he felt
no shame in doing so, and he believed no man there
would feel ashamed of him. He sat for the borough
for fifteen years, and he made a great sacrifice
when his connexion with it was severed, which was
brought about in consequence of his attachment
to free trade principles. The hon. baronet then read from
a book that the influence at Warwick was possessed by the
Earl of Warwick and Brooke, but that it was not of a stable
character, and since the reform act money influence had
been more successful. (Laughter.) It appeared to him to be
a libel upon the constitution of the country that any hon.
gentleman should defend the present state of things, and
should oppose upon all occasions vote by ballot, without
proposing a remedy for the abuses which existed. (Hear.)
Sir Wm. Blackstone said it was essential to the well-being
of Parliament that the elections of members should be free,
though ha deplored the depravity of human nature which
prevented that being at all times practised. All arguments
against the ballot appeared to him to be imaginary, while
the evils which existed under the present system were patent
and undeniable. (Hear.) Within his experience he knew of
no place where the ballot would not be hailed by the people.
It had been said that if they adopted the ballot they must
give up canvassing. Well, the evils resulting from that sys-
tem were so great, that he thought it another argument in
favour of the ballot. When a candidate went to a place to
canvass for votes, he was immediately attended by the cler-
gymen, lawyers, and others, who wanted his money for
local purposes. In speaking of Durham, and the influence
which existed there, the hon, baronet said he would do the
people of that borough the justice to say that in 1853, after
an election committee had vacated a seat en the ground of
bribery, the electors determined b carry on the election on
purity principles, and he believed it to be true that they
were fully carried out, but at the same time he thought he
would have gained the election if it had been allowable to
spend money. In 1843 the hon. member for Birmingham
(Mr. Bright) was returned for Durham by a majority of 58,
but it was afterwards stated in tne columns Ul Lan ncui,ee,cy

Post that the free-trade candidate would not have been re-

turned if the Marquis of Londonderry had exerted his in-
fluence. Now, at the election in 1853, when the electors
found that no money was to be spent, they desired that no
hustings should be erected, and that in every way curtailed
the expenses of the candidates. The " black" influence was
brought to bear upon that election, and he (Sir C. Douglas)
was defeated by about 109 colliers, which were driven up to
vote for the Conservative candidate. The expense of the
election was to him about £6O, which went to pay the
charges of the returning officer and for printing his own
speeches. The hon. baronet then, amidst much impatience
on the Opposition side of the house, referred to letters which
he had received, in which the writers alleged that they
were unable to vote according to their inclinations, and he
also referred to a speech of the right hon. gentleman the
member for Wiltshire:(Mr. S. Estcourt), in which he said he
would vote for the ballot if it could be made perfectly se-
cret. (Hear.) They had all heard of a set of men who
were supposed to be the most venal, debauched, and de-
praved in the country, those who went by the name of
" fong •shore men" in the City. The house might allow
him to assure them that in the management of their private
and internal affairs they were a highly respectable body of
men. (Cries of " Divide," and interruption.) They were
governed by a ruler whom they chose out of their own
body, and whom they elected by ballot. On these occa-
sions there was an absence amongst them of all drunken-
ness, 'riot, and debauchery. But on the occasion of an
election for the city of London everything was changed ;
they were exposed to the influences of money and drink,
demoralisation and corruption were set to work, until it
became notorious that in order to secure a seat for the
City, the votes of the " long. shore men" must be se-
cured. (Repeated cries of " Divide.") He (Sir C.
Douglas) thanked the house for the amount of time
which they had permitted to him hitherto—(ironical
cheers)—but he was under no obligation to honourable
members opposite, who had persisted in interrupting him ;
and he was well aware that when hon. members were de-
termined to put an end to a debate, or to go to dinner, it
was useless to oppose their wishes. This, however, he did
trust and hope, that they would not repeat this year the
course which was adopted last, a course which reflected on
her Majesty's Government in a way that was unworthy of
it, and which did no credit to the house itself. (Cheers, and
cries of " Divide.")
The house divided, and the numbers were—
In favour of the motion 154
Against it
Majority —l2s

The motion was consequently lost.
CONVEYANCE OF ARMS UNDER THE SAR-
DINIAN FLAG.

Mr. T. DUNCOMBE moved fora copy of correspondence

with foreign powers that had taken place relative to certain

arms conveyed at the close of the last year under the Sar-
dinian flag from Genoa to the East, and seized by the
Moldo •Wallachian government ; also all orders and corres-
pondence for bringing back in her Majesty's ship the Ban-
shee from Galatz to Genoa all or any portion of the said
arms. He said; why the noble lord on a previous occasion
had refused to give these returns he was at a loss to con-
ceive. Nothing was more absurd thanwhat was now taking
place, namely, that the British Government was refusing
papers which had been granted to every other country of
Europe.. He begged further to move for a copy of the
address of Count Cavour to the Sardinian minister here, in
reply to a despatch of the noble lord dated at the end of
January last. He wanted to know why the noble lord re-
fused those papers ; sooner or later they must be given ; or,
at all events, they were sure to be published in other coun-
tries.

Mr. HENNESSY seconded the motion.
Lord J. RUSSELL said the hon. member seemed to
think that it was the duty of the Foreign Secretary to lay
on the table all the correspondence that passed between
this country and foreign powers, and that if refused the
Foreign Secretary was bound to justify their refusal. He
(Lord J. Russell) did not feel bound to justify his refusal,
nor either did he feel bound to give, the papers. It had
never been the custom to produce all foreign correspondence,
as to do so would often have produced great discord and in-
convenience. With regard to the despatch of the 20th
January, he had only held it back for the answer, and when
the answer was received both despatch and answer were
laid on the table. His hesitation in the first instance arose
only from his fear that Count Cavour might not wish the
despatch published. Subsequently he found that the Count

wished that his opinions should be made knoN'm. The hon

member might think it very strange in him (Lord J. Rus-
sell) to endeavour to maintain the peace of Europe ; but he
thought otherwise, and he should be very sorry to give
any papers, the production of which might create discord
amongst the different powers. The hon. member had laid
no Parliamentary ground for the production of these papers,
nor had ho satisfied him (Lord J. Russell) that they could
be produced without injury to the public service. The cor-
respondence had taken place in consequence of arms having
been sent from Genoa to the Principalities of Wallachia and
Moldavia, in the course of last autumn. These arms were
not desired by Prince Couza. Far be it from him (Lord
J. Russell) to interfere between Austria and Hungary,
his only wish was that the Diet and the Austrian Govern-
ment might come to an early agreement. (Hear, hear.)
His hope was that those promises of liberty that had been
given by Austria might be amply fulfilled, and that Hungary
might get such securities for a free press, free discussion, and
personal liberty as should make her content to remain
under the rule of the King of Hungary. He had interfered
in no way whatever in the affairs of Hungary, his only wish
was that the desired constitution might be obtained ; but it
was a totally different thing to collect arms in a neighbour-
ing country for the purpose of disturbing the dominions of
the Emperor of Austria. When the Sultan found that his
dominion was to be made a depot for arms collected for such
purposes, and that Austria became aware of the fact, both
sovereigns became very much dissatisfied. He could not
find fault with them for that. He did not think that any
sovereign was bound to foment, or evento permit, an insur-
rection in his dominions, but on the contrary, that he should
resist it to the utmost. The interference of this Govern-
ment had consisted in telling Prince Couza—whose political
existence depended on the treaties of 1856 and the conven-
tions connected with those treaties—that it was his duty to
the Sultan to send away those arms, Prince Couza said he
was willing to send away the arms ; that it was against his
wish they hadbeen introduced, and inimical to the interests
of his country. He did not know, however, how the arms
were to be conveyed away, until at last Sir Henry Bulwer
applied to her Majesty's Government, stating that he had
been asked by the Sultan and Prince Couza to convey the
arms to Constantinople en route to Genoa. The hen. mem-
ber seemed to think that the Sultan and Prince Coriza ought
not only to have permitted preparations to be made within
their dominions against the Emperor of Austria, but ought
to have given encouragement to such preparations. Being
anxious to preserve the peace of Europe he (Lord J. Russell)
did not think it was necessary to produce all the correspon-
dence in connexion with these transactions ; besides which
he might mention that the Foreign-office was completely
overwhelmed with business in consequence of the quantity
of papers it was constantly called on to produce.
Mr. DUNCOMBE maintained that the Danubian Prin-
cipalities had made no objection to these arms passing
through. They were seized at the mouths of the Danube,
and confiscated by Prince Couza. No doubt they were
in-
tended for Hungary, whose people were arming agains.4
Austria, and there were only two ways by which they could
receive them ; ono wls the coast of Dalmatia, and the
other the mouths of the Danube. The noble lord guarded
the Dalmatian coast with his great fleet and the 800 guns
at Corfu, which he supposed explained the interests which
the noble lord had stated England had to guard in the
Adriatic. The noble lord was not carrying out, with re-
gard to Hungary, the principle he had professed in the case
of Italy, but protected Austria on the ground that she was
to serve m a counter➢oise to France. We wanted no MU-