The Sun.
London, England, 1859-04-01 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

THE REFORM BILL.
THE ADJOURNED DEBATE.

- -
Sir R. PEEL said he rose for the purpose of making a
few observations on the important subject under discussion,
and considering the number of gentlemen who were still
desirous of addressing the house he certainly thought that
the time for making long speeches had well-nigh gone by.
(Hear, hear.) At all events, if any gentleman desired to
. .
address the house before the conclusion of the debate, he
trusted the house would accord to them, as it had done to
those who preceded, its kind and courteous attention. After
this protracted discussion, after the very satisfactory man-
ner in which this bill had been debated; after every part of
it had been dissected and disembowelled, to use the expres-
sion of his right hon. friend the member for Ashton, after
the very admirable manner in which the question had been
treated in the able speech of the right hon. baronet the
member for Carlisle, he did not propose to enter into any
lengthened disquisitions upen the subject of the franchise,
nor on the philosophy which the right hon. gentleman the
Secretary for the Colonies had introduced into the discus-
sion of this middle-class bill. (Hear, hear.) He should
not enter upon a discussion of the Grey letter, or of the
misgivings of the hon. member for Cambridge town.
Neither should he quote Clarendon,
,Mackintosh, or De
Tocqueville, or the Athiest friends of the Under Secretary
for India. (Laughter.) He was surprised that the noble
lord had quoted the opinions of a man like Mr. Holyoake.
(Hear, hear.) The noble lord ought to recollect that this
was a man who went about the country lecturing against
the Bible. (Hear, hear.) He attempted to do so lately at
Doncaster, but the feeling against him was so strong that
the mayor who had given the building was obliged to with-
draw his permission. (Hear, hear.) At that stage of the
debate they could scarcely hope to introduce any fresh
materials of criticism, but they might still derive some ad-
vantage from looking with a critical eye on the debate which
had taken place. They might follow the example of the
First Lord of the Admiralty, and discuss the question with-
out any asperity, as he did—'hear, hear)—or discuss it
with the modest mildness of the Solicitor-General. (Hear,
hear.) ale would ask—where were they? (Laughter.) Hon.
gentlemen might laugh, he did not mean in what part of
that assembly of 600 palpitating members—he meant, where
were they in the discussion of this great and serious ques-
tion ? He had sat there almost without solution of con-
tinuity. (Laughter.) They had sat there since Monday
week listening to the opinions and sentiments expressed, and
membersmight well be astonished and bewildered, notes to
how they would vote, but by the opinions they had heard
expressed. It was said of the celebrated John Wilkes that
when asked what his politics were, he replied, " I never
was a Wilkesite." A great many hon. gentlemen were in
that position ; they had heard opinions from that side which
ought to have come from the other, and from the other side
opinions which ought to have come from that ; they had,'
heard from Conservative members not only Liberal, but
Radical sentiments—(hear, hear)—whilst on that side they
had heard hon. gentlemen endeavouring to throw dissent
among their ranks, and holding opinions which might very
well come from the right hon. member for Cambridge and
the right hon. gentleman who sat beside him. Those two
gentlemen had left the Government with great dignity.
(Hear, hear.) Lord Derby had said he had lost two Radical
colleagues; that was a new name for the right hon. mem-
ber for Oxfordshire—(a laugh)—and it must have struck
dismay into the heart of many an Oxford squire to hear him
qualified by the Prime Minister as a Radical. (Laughter.)
An hon. gentlemen asked him if he was afraid of the people ?
I am not afraid of the people, says that burly country gen-
tleman, the junior member for Dorsetshire. (Great laughter.)
The right hon. member for Stroud has been styled a pala-
din. (Laughter.) He certainly had galloped very freely
through the ranks, but happily he bad got a fall—(hear,
hear)—and his passion must have since been somewhat sub-
dued by the ample dose of Dover Powder he had received.
(Great laughter.) As for theright hon. gentleman who ad-
dressed the house on Tuesday, that ornament of the
assembly, such was his power of debate, such his excellent
eloquence, that he must be a bold man who did not hesitate
to rise after he had addressed himself to any subject.
They hied also heard the right hon. gentleman the member
for Dublin University. Some one had called him a windy
orator. (Laughter.) He must say that if the debate had
commenced on Monday week very windy, they had since
had the cataract and the volcano—" the torrent and tem-
pest of passion." The hon. gentleman who had just re-
moved from his seat, said he had not entirely given up the
opinions he advocated last year. They were certainly rather
strong. Perhaps the hon. gentleman did not know exactly
what they were. When it was proposed to entend the fran-
chise and increase the number of electors in the counties,
the hon. gentleman said, "Their sense of honour, and love
of fair play would not let them look tamely on and see such
great mischief done." He was glad to find the hon. gen-
tleman had not entirely given up these opinions. (Hear.)
He was not surprised if members could not make up their
minds—what with resolutions, counter-resolutions, pro-
posals, and propositions. He would like to ask the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer what will be the fate of the bill, or,
in the language of the fashionable novelist who sat beside
him, what will he do with it ? (Laughter and cheers.) The
right hon. member for Dublin University had likened the
noble lord and the noble viscount and a third to the witches
round a cauldron of incantation. The Chancellor reminded
him of Hamlet soliloquising :
" To be, or not to be, that is the question :
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind, to suffer
The sling and arrows of outrageous fortune ;
Or to take arms against the sea of troubles,
And, by opposing, end them 7—To die,—"
To die ; not at all. (Cheers and laughter.) The noble lord
the member for Tiverton told the Government they had
much better go on, and if the resolution was adopted, in-
corporate it with the bill. The First Lord of the Admiralty
told them it was an offensive and factious resolution. (Hear.)
He thought such an expression of opinion was not at all
justified. (Hear, hear.) Let them consider what this bill
was? It was r reposed to amend the laws relating to the re-
presentation of the people ; every single portion of it had
been objected to, and universal fault and dissatisfaction ex-
pressed against it, but if adopted they would have this ad-
vantage, that it might lead almost immediately to some prac-
tical legislation, which would be an advantage to the house
and the country. What was the resolution ? At first sight,
but at first sight only, it seemed open to the objection that
it was a mere abstract proposition, and one hon. member said
he could not determine to vote for it,' as it did not state the
exact opinions and intentions of the noble lord. The Solici-
tor General and the First Lord of the Admiralty had told
them the resolution was most irregular; but they were now
positively assured that the resolution was quite regular,
quite Parliamentary, and quite consistent. (Hear, hear.)
The ex-commissionerimperial—(laughter)—told them there
was no precedent for such a resolution being moved on the
second reading, which selected the important points of the
bill for objection. The Solicitor-General said such a course
was unprecedented in the Parliamentary annals of the ceun-
try. In 1844 when the Bark Charter Act was before the
house, an amendment in the shape of a resolution was in oved
by Mr. Hawes, and the numbers were ayes 185, noes 30.
On that occasion there voted for the resolution the right
hon. member for Oxford University and the present Mi-
nister for War. (Hear, hear.) Hon. gentlemen complain
that they do not know what are the intentions of the noble
lord. If the resolution werecarried and the Government de-
feated, and if they relinquished office, he believed the noble
lord would be prepared, without delay, to lay a bill on the
table. (Hear, hear.) He believed the noble lord would be
ready to pledge himself to do so, if the house sanctioned his
resolution. (Hear, from Lord J. Russell.) He would treat
the subject in a statesmanlike and straightforward manner.
(Hear, hear.) The resolution involved every serious issue.
They were told that if adopted it would be tantamount tea
defeat of the Government. He for one did not see that
would be a very great or serious inconvenience. (Hear,
hear.) It was not the first time they had got rid of a weak
Government and substituted a strong one to deal with
a great question. As regarded the question of reform,
he did not think it would be any very serious inconvenience
if the Government was defeated, and the discussion ad-
journed, perhaps for a year or two, as suggested by the hon.
members for Birmingham and Ashton. (An HoN. Mtm-
mut—Five years.) Let the question be adjourned even for
five years, and let a little healthy agitation take place.
(Hear.) A full and free discussion of the great principles
involved could not but be advantageous, and could not but
tend to exercise a wholesome and legitimate influence on
their debates. (Hear.) The noble lord had been the object
of the sneering observations of the Solicitor-General. It
was quite true the learned gentleman had that evening
given a tardy expression of his regret—(" oh," "hear")—
but he had taunted the noble lord, and urged him to give
some expression of his intention. (Hear.) He thought he
had found a vulnerable point, and came down with extracts
from country papers, showing that somebody said some-
where that Lord John and John Bright had come to an
understanding; he imputed to the noble lord most unworthy
motives of private advantage—('c no, no," and cheers)—he
did impute them. (" No, no," and cheers.) The noble lord,
however, had treated the hon. and learned gentleman's ex-
planation with so much kindness, that he would not further
allude to it. (Hear, hear.) The hon. and learned gentle-
man should recollect that those who live in glass-houses—
(oh, oh)—he would say it, those who lived in glass-houses
should not throw stones ; he had tried a dodge to injure the
noble lord, but it had recoiled on himself, and lie might
now go and philosophise with the Secretary for the Colonies
on this middle-class bill. (Laughter.) The Secretary for
the Colonies said the mainspring and backbone of the bill
was the preservation to the middle classes of the political
power which for twenty years they had exercised so much
to the advantage of the state. The whole inside of the bill
had been disembowelled by the right hon. member for
Stroud, and had neither principle nor backbone. The bill
had excited nothing but dissatisfaction, it did nothing but
unsettle existing. arrangements. He maintained it did not
admit any considerable portion of the working classes to the
enjoyment of their rights ; it admitted some new classes, but
it deprived the borough freeholders of their ancient rights
it maintained all the small boroughs, and (what was one of
the most objectionable parts) it proposed to introduce voting
papers. The small number of electors voting at the late
election for Marylebone was urged as an argument for their
introduction; but it proved nothing, as, of course, with two
Liberal candidates in the field, the Conservative hectors
would not care to vote. These voting papers, like those
used in the election of guardians by parishes, would be
liable to a great amount of fraud. He did not want to see
any serious displacement of the present system ; he wasnot
in favour of electoral districts, or of uniformity of suffrage ;
he very much adhered to the opinion of the right hon.
member for Carlisle, who said a few evenings no, "I will
say. that a bill, taking as the new point of departure the £lO
franchise for counties, lowering to a considerable extent the
borough franchise—prohibiting the payment of travell'ng
expenses, multiplying polling places, disfranchising within
moderate limits the smaller boroughs, and enfranchising,
with strict impartiality, the larger counties and the larger
cities—l say that even now, at this moment, my belief is
that a bill so framed would command support on each side
of the house. To such a measure he would be disposed to
give his cordial adhesion. He trusted he should see this
principle soon embraced in a bill which might load to a
satisfactory issue. He trusted that this year, next year, or
perhaps in two or three years, they would have a measure
which might lead to a satisftictory settlement, instead of
this crude and ill-digested bill. The right hon. member
for Cambridge had said it was crude and ill-digested. The
House of Commons had said so, and had been almost unani-
mous in the condemnation of the Governnient bill. In
doing so they had shown Ministers a faithful mirror of the
public mind out of doors, by giving echo to the sentiments
expressed on the platform of every meeting which had been

held. They could not conceal from themselves there wasa great and growing desire to give the franchise ftAti ?those
classes who, by their intelligence and social posifien, were
justly entitled to the right. The House of Cox-nnias would
'listen to that appeal, but not by adopting this bastard
system of legislation. He trusted this question ward eon
pass into abler and better hands—into those of the
aline
lord, who had an hereditary claim, or those of. the hon.
member for Birmingham, who represented the feelipg out
of doors. It was said the noble lord was actuated by Pal ty
motives, and this was a subtle party move to disPllce the
Government. He for one would support the resolution,
but not on party or on factious grounds, but on -public
grounds. He for one was no enemy to party connexions ;
by party the house was governed. He should vote with
the noble lord and the noble viscount, bemuse he believed
that on this occasion their conduct was governed -by the
purest motives. As far as he was individually concerned,
he had shown he was not prepared to give up to party liis
right to judgment on important questions. On two very
great occasions, he had assisted as much individually as
any man to displace the Government, although lie had felt
the deepest regret at being obliged to separate himself from
a statesman for whom he entertained the wannest sym-
pathy on public grounds, and towards whom he felt the
warmest feelings of personal attachment. They had been
taunted with the difference of opinion on that sale of the
house, but they would see that in the moment of a great
crisis they could be united. with the exception of two or
three deserters. They would not hesitate to stand faithful
to the principles which had made the great Liberal party be
recognised as the organ of public opinion ; they would re-
main true to their colours, and stand faithfully to their
principles, and look forward with proud confidence to the
result of the division, with the hope that the ultimate re-
sult would justify them, and that in the triumphant ma-
jority which would welcome the success of the resolution,
the people would recognise the wisdom and the justice of
that house. (Cheers.)
Mr. GASKELL would have been content to give a silent
vote if he could entirely concur either with the Government
or with the noble lord. There were some parts of the bill
he did not approve of; but he could not vote for the reso-
lution ' • it appeared to him to raise a false issue. (Hear.)
Mr. SLANEY said ho should vote for the resolution,
not because he wished to destroy the bill, but because he
hoped to see it amended.
Mr. E. C. EGERTON trusted that the Government
would see the necessity of reducing the borough franchise,
and would not allow the carrying of the resolution to pre-
vent them from proceeding with the bill at a period which
was so favourable for the settlement of the question.
Mr. COBBETT wished to state his reasons for voting in.
&Tour of the second reading of the bill. He did not ap-
prove of the whole bill; on the contrary, there were many
of its details of which he disapproved; but there were a
variety of new franchises which had occupied public atten-
tion almost ever since the passing of the Reform Bill of
1632, and ho thought it very desirable that the bill should be
read a second tune, in order that they might.be considered
in committee. The bill was wide enough in its scope to
allow of the opening of the question of the ballot. The re-
gistration of votes was included in the very title of the bill;
and the hon. member for Bristol (Mr. H. Berkeley) might
take advantage of that to propose in committee a clause em-
bodying the principle of vote by ballot. lie did not call him-
self a man of the people, but from long habit and from the
education he received in his early days—(cheers)—he had a
very strong desire to see those who laboured, whether at the
loom or on the land, in r far better position than they now
were. (Hear, hear.) lie knew there wpre those among them
who suffered greatly, and he thought the house ought to give
their attention to this. His own conviction was that if they
attended to this more than they did they would find the
working class not so anxious for these changes, which seine
called organic, but that they would find that class satisfied
with the efforts of the house, while the house would better
represent the working men than it did at present. (Cheers.)
'Mr. COLLINSsaid he concurred with those who thought
that something ought to lie done to settle this question ;
and holding that view, he should give his vote against the
resolution. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. WESTERN objected to the transfer of the county
voters to the borough, even in those cases where the bill
would fairly operate as a transfer. The mischief would be
that those voters in most cases would be non-residents. This
effect would result—the resident electors having =interest
in the affairs of the borough would be swamped by the non-
resident voters. (Hear.) There were other portions of the
bill equally objectionable, but after the long and able debate
which had taken place, he would not further obtrude on
the attention of the house. lie approved of the principle
enunciated in the resolution of the noble lord the member
for London, and should accordingly give it the support of
his vote.
Mr. HODGSON would vote against the resolution of the
noble lord. He could not but think that the house had not
treated the Government with the forbearance which, under
the circumstances attending this question, they deserved.
With respect to the bill, he did not mean to say that he en-
tertained no objections which might not easily be removed
in committee. It was his intention to vote against the re-
solution, and in favour of the Government bill.
Mr. WYVILL intended to support the second reading
of the bill, because he thought it might be made a good
bill in committee, and also because he believed that, if they
rejected it, it would be impossible to pass any measure of
reform during the present session.
Mr. G. HUDSON complained that the resolution of the
noble lord, besides being unparliamentary was an unusual
proceeding on the second reading of a, bill. He (Mr. Hudson)
should vote against the resolution, because he believed that
it was not intended to advance reform, but to be used as a
mere clap-trap for the purpose of defeating the bill. The
noble lord refused everything, and pledged himself to
nothing. He should not again follow the noble lord into
the lobby for the sole purpose of turning out a ministry, to
whose admirable manner of conducting the business of the
country every man who had risen in that debate had borne
testimony. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. WALTER said that he fully agreed with the de-
scription which had been given by the right hon. member
for South Wiltshire, that this bill would require to be gutted
before it was rendered passable; whilst of the resolution it
might with equal justice be said that it committed nobody,
and meant nothing precise. This was a very disagreeable
predicament for the house to be placed in. With the per-
mission of the house lie \would state the reasons why he
should vote against the secend leading, and also abstain
from voting in favour of the noble lord's resolution. Con-
sidering all the circumstances of Lord Derby's Govern-
ment, he (Mr. Walter) had been of opinion that refoun was
a question with which he should not have meddled at all.
Had Lord Derby openly taken that course, the country
would have been perfectly satisfied with him, but, like other
imprudent people, he accepted a bill without considering
how he was to meet it. Beside all this, he might have
known that, however liberal might be the measure he
brought in, it would fail to satisfy the Opposition, as the
temptation to them to outbid him would be too great to be
resisted. (Hear.) With regard to the identification of the
suffrage, there had been a great deal of discussion, as hon.
gentlemen seemed to confound equality with identity,
whereas the two things were perfectly distinct. Equality
of suffrage was a question of degree, whereas identity was
a confusion of qualifications ; and here he had to express
his approval of the bill, inasmuch as it preserved the va-
riety in the qualifications. For his own part he was an ad-
vocate for an equal franchise in boroughs and in counties,
and on this point he thought the hon. gentleman the mem-
ber for Oldham had done more for the Government than
any of the Government's own members had done in defend-
ing that portion of the bill which had been most attacked
by the other speakers in the course of the debate. Should
the resolution be adopted, which was likely to be the case
by a small majority, he did not see why Government might
not withdraw the bill and bring in another based upoit'what
were now understood to be the views of the house. Itti*y.'
took that course he would willingly give them his support.
But the worst course they could pursue was to dissolve, foe
it would be :highly improper for them, a Conservative
Government, to go to the country on a Reform Bill. If
the Government were to dissolve, they might possibly gain
some strength ; but they would in that case fling upon the
floor of the political arena a bill which would become,:tbe
subject of a squabble among the most radical and *lent
classes in the community.
Mr. GREENATL said he had come to the conclusion
that his vote ought to be against the resolution of thenelile
lord the member for London; for although the noble:lord
might possibly carry that resolution by a small majeritK.
still he did not believe that he would be able to produce' a
better measure than that into which the bill of the Govern-
ment might be converted if the house were to go into com-
mittee upon it.

Mr. GILPIN was willing to state at once that lie was
prepared to vote for the resolution of the noble lord the
member for the City of London; and if he had no other
reason for doing so, it would be that which the right hop..
gentleman the member for Oxford gave upon a notable oc-
casion, viz., that every word of the resolution was as true as
Gospel. (Hear, hear.) He was convinced that to givothe
franchise to the working classes was the best means to make
them feel they had an interest in their country. (Hear.)
Mr. HENLEY would not have thought it necessar,
under ordinary circumstances, to have addressed any obser-
vations to the house ; but it was known that he, in
common with his late right; hen. colleague (Mr. Walpole),
was unable to give his assent to the bill of the Government.
He had listened with great attention to the whole of this
debate, and if he had heard anything which in any degree
shook the opinion he had formed of it, he should not have
had the least hesitation in saying so. (Hear, hear.) He
thought the bill was somewhat underrated. It was in
his opinion, a very large measure, not only in what it
did, but still more in the principles it contained. Now,
according to the most moderate computation it increased
the constituencies by one-half. (Hear, hear.) The mea-
sure that did this could not be a very small one. (Hear,
hear.) Various reasons had been put forward for the equa-
lisation of the occupation franchise in town and county.
The noble lord the Secretary for India had said how absurd
it was that a man living on one side of a street should have
a vote for the county, and a man living on the other side
should not. That might be very well if there were not other
anomalies of a still larger character. The hon. member the
Under-Secretary for the Home Department (Mr. Hardy)
justified this measure upon what seemed to him to be a
rather extraordinary mode of reasoning. He said that this
was not a change in the principle of the county suffrage,
because an occupation franchise was introduced into coun-
ties by the Reform Act of 1832. But the great question
was how the principle had been applied. No one could say
that the introduction of the county occupation franchise by
the Act of 1832 had at all altered the fact of property being
the basis of the county qualification; (Hear, hear.) It
added perhaps a fifth or sixth to the number of voters. But
what did the present bill do ? The present number of
county voters was estimated at 500,000. The bill proposed
to let m 300,000 occupation voters. But what did it do be-
sides ? For some purpose which it was not easy to under-
stand they took out of the county representation 100,000
freehold voters and added them to the towns. The result
would be that property would be sure to be overwhelmed,
and the whole electoral powers of the counties would be in
the occupation voters. That would be the plain result of
the measure. He would not say anything whether £lO oc-
cupation was a proper or an improper limit; but the vast
majority of the voters would belong to that class. Power
would be completely in their hands. A great many argu-
ments had been used against lowering the franchise in
towns; but no one had pointed out the danger of reducing
the county franchise so as to put the whole power into the
hands of one class. The bill had been spoken of as a mea-
sure dealing with a subject that had never been dealt
with before. The counties contained upwards of 10
millions of people, and they were about to vastly en-
large the constituencies. But while there were 10 mil-
lions of population in the counties there were between
seven and eight millions in the boroughs. For the 10
millions in the counties there were 500,000 voters, and for
the seven millions in the boroughs there were 430,000
voters. It was proposed to take 100,000 from counties, and
put them into the boroughs. He was not touching now on
the fancy franchises. That gave 500,000:in the boroughs
and 700,060 in the counties. But what was to be done
with regard to members ? You were going largely to in-
cerase the voters in counties, with scarcely any addition to
the members. The measure now proposed proceeded on the

basis that there was not to be any great redistribution of
seats. But could any one suppose that if' you C.-ere going to
add 300,000 voters to the counties they would be long con-
tent without a redistribution of seats ? It was impossible to
suppose such a thing. If the constituencies were the same
and the quality of voters the same, and the fen millions had
only IGO representatives, and the seven millions 330, could
such a strange state of things exist for a moment? He might
be met from the Treasury bench by the argument that ho
must not complain because the counties had always had a
less number of representatives than boroughs, and that that
• was the old state of things. He did not complain,' but if the
answer was a good one, what became of the equality of the
£lO franchise, for there hadalwrys been a diference between
the county and borough voters? If you created equality of
voting, it was impossible to keep off redistribution of seats,
and you must give the counties their just 'share of the let re-
sentation. The noble lord the Secretary for India said that
the Government bill was just the thing to smooth down that
difficulty. If so, how can those who were averse to a redis-
tribution of seats think the measure so geed a one? What
would become of the exist:ng Vetere. in counties ? It could
not be said exactly how it would work; but it was clear that
the present constituencies would be swamped. If you
brought in at once a number of new voters equal to three to
four, it was clear that the old voters would stand in a dif-
ferent position to that in which they now stood. • Ho came
now to the extension of the suffrage in boroughs The ques-
tien had been argued on that the (Ministerial) side of the
house, and the hon. and learned member for Cambridge
borough had given a distinct definition of what was in-
tended when he said that we should no longer have a
rough and clumsy mode of letting in people to the franchise,
that the old-fashioned system of letting them in in the gross was no longer to exist; the principle must be that of mice-
, tion. The hon. and learned member gave a curious illustra-
tion of the principle. He said when a man was tried for his
life, or for his character, which was dearer than his life, by
a jury, for any such purpose any 12 men were sufficient,
but when you come to the more responsible matter of elect-
ing a member of Parliament, by the 19-1000th part of the
electors of Marylebone or the Tower Hamlets, you could
not trust to the same rough process, but you must have the
principle of selection. It was said that you would rot the
best of the working classes by the new franchises proposed.
He (Mr. Henley) wished to examine them, and see how you
would get the best of that class. It was not pretended (he
was not speaking of that portion of the working classes who
were humbler than those who had £lO houses)—it was not
asserted—that the franchise, which took in doctors, and
lawyers, and schoolmasters, would affect them—they
were, the gems of the collection. (Hear, and a laugh.) The
next class were the lodgers. He did not apprehend that men
who paid Ss. a week for lodgings, or ss. a week for unfur-
nished rooms would be of a lower class than £lO house-
holders. Then, the cnly thing which remained was the sav-
ings bank franchise. They were told that you would not
reduce the £lO franchise on account of the anomaly i 1 IliCh
would arise ' • but he should like to know how the anomaly
between the franchise for £3OO iii-the Three per Cent. Con-
sols and the £63 savings bank franchise was to be recon-
ciled. Both were to be money or money's worth in Govern-
ment securities, and how £6O in one Government security,
and £3OO in another, could be equality, he could not com-
prehend. (Hear.) Was £6O in a savings bank a fair test by
which you could say that a man among the working classes
who did not possess it was not as respectable and trustworthy
as a man who did? (Hear, hear.) He said that it was no
such test at all. He was ready to admit that a man who had
£6O in the savings bank might be, and probably was, a most
respectable person ; but what were the circumstances under
which one man had it and another did not possess it—for
that was the real point? (Hear, hear.) It was said that
you wanted to measure a man's prudence, self-respect, and
care, and that was the security But there was a difference
between a married man and a single man, and between a
man with a large and a man with a small family. (Hear,
hear.) He (Mr. Henley) happened to be a man with a large
family. A man might be respectable and trustworthy
among the working classes, although he might not be able
to put money in the savings bank. There was such a thing
as putting children to school among the humbler as well as
the higher classes. There were thousanas of children run-
ning about the streets who did not go to school, and if a man
with four or five children let them run about the streets, and
sent his wife to work in a factory, if he was a money-mak-
ing man he might get £6O in the savings bank, but he was
not a more respectable member of society than a man who
put his children to school and let his wife attend to his
family, and therefore did not make money. (Hear.) There
fere £6O in the savings bank was not a fair test of a mem-
ber of the working classes having a right to the franchise.
He did not admit that the savings bank franchise standing
alone was a criterion of the right of a working man to the
franchise. The right hon. gentleman the Secretary for the
Colonies spoke of the danger of the extension of the fran-
chise in that direction. His right hon. friend nearhim (Mr.
Vi7alpole) spoke of a £6 franchise. That would admit
100,001 voters, not more; but if you made that alteration
in the borough franchise, which was now 400,000, would
that compare with what was proposed by the bill, namely to
let in 300,000 or 400,000 ? He would now say a word or two
on the amendment of the noble lord. That was the question
before the house, and which bore on the vote of every mem-
ber. He agreed with what had been said, that they had
not got the issue fairly before them. It was not the question
of the second reading of the bill simply and purely. They
had got on the one hand the amendment of the noble lord,
and, on the other, the declaration of the Government. He
should have occasion to notice both. What did
the noble lord's amendment secure—for that was the
first question ? It secured, certainly, to those who affirmed
it, that there would be no transfer of the freehold franchise
in boroughs. The great part of that was completely met by
the clauses which had been somewhat irregularly put into
the bill by the Government. What did the last part of the
amendment do ? It was as vague as anything could be—so
vague that no human being could assign any definite mean-
ing to it. If the Government was to reduce the lodger fran-
chise fromSs. to 7s. 6d., it \muld satisfy the noble lord's
amendment. Was it worth while to meet such a measure
by such an amendment; arid he asked himself why it had
been done. It seemed to him to have but one object. He did
not deal with men's motives ; he had nothing to do with
them, and he thought they would be better without them.
(Laughter.) The only object was to get the votes of many
inemburs of the house, who did not like to vote against the
;second reading of the Reform Bill; and it was a kind of
means of kicking out the bill without that inconvenience_
(Hear.) That seemed to be the object of the amendment.
He, for one, could not join in that process. (Hear.) He
(Mr. Henley) was one of those who thought it very de-
sirable this question should, if possible, be settled. There
were two things which he had gathered hon.' this debate.
One was, that a very considerable number of members of
the house, if not the majority, were anxious that the thing
should be settled this year. (Cheers.) Ho also believed the
larger number were quite disposed to say that in its present
shape the Government bill would not settle this question.
(Cheers.) Of those two points anybody who had attended to
the debate must be pretty well aware. He, then, for one, was
ready to go into committee on the bill ; and lie hoped when
they got into committee, the deliberations of the house would
have their due weight with the Government, and induce
them, if possible, to get the bill into such a shape as to afford
reasonable ground of satisfying the more moderate people.
It was quite out of the question to satisfy all. (Cheers.) Do
what they would, they could not do that. He quite aereed
in thinking that it did not matter one farthing what bill the
Government brcught forward. (Cheers.) He believed
whatever it was, it would have been pulled about and torn
to pieces, and a party would have been formed against it,
just as much as had now been done. (Hear, hear.) This
was very natural, and he blamed nobody for it. It was very
natural on a subject which was one of such enormous diffi-
culty that hardly any two persons in private conversation
soould agree upon it ; and, the Government not having a ma-
jority in the house, it was a very tempting opportunity for
the gentlemen opposite to exercise what was their perfect
right, and tear any measure of the Government to pieces. It
was something more than their right—he did not know that
:it was not their duty—to tear it to pieces, if it was capable
of being torn, because, no doubt, by that means, we might
get a better measure. (Hear, hear.) But he would also say
to the Government that, considering the position they were
kavhen they took office, and that they were now bringing
forward a bill under such known and vast difficulties, that
did not place them in the same position with regard to
making alterations which they could not agree to, as if they
had a great majority at their beck, and their own friends
'hid not been divided in opinion. He would venture in all
humility to say that this was an important consideration
for the Government, with respect to their own followers in
going into committee. The situation was a peculiar one,
.and must be judged of by its peculiar circumstances ; and
those rules could not be applied to it which probably would
otherwise, in a general way, be applied in a case where the
Government had a majority at its beck, instead of being in
a known minority, with a great number of its own friends
differing in opinion. He had stated frankly his objections
to this measure, and he now stated, equally frankly, why
he could not support the motion of the noble lord, which
would do no good, but hang up the subject for another
year, and give more opportunity for that agitation which
some persons would be glad enough to create. Those per-
sons, indeed, if a Reform Bill was brought forward with
the provisions of which they could not agree, would use
it as additional fuel for the fire, and no good would come
of that but exasperation of feeling, and setting one class
against another. He was, therefore, very anxious, as rapidly
as possible, to settle this question. Many members had
said that if we took one step downwards, we must go to the
last step at once, with no resting place between. He doubted
that very much; he did not think the people of this coun-
try were unreasonable. (Cheers.) He believed we could
go down by steps, and go safer by steps. His great objec-
tion to this bill was that it laid' down a principle which
would prevent our going down by steps, because equalising
the occupation franchise throughout the whole country
would to a great degree have that effect. (Hear, hear.)
Equality of franchise, in his opinion, was dangerous. Two
examples had been quoted to frighten the house—those of
France and America.. He did not want either of them, but
our own mixed constitution, in which each part of the com-
munity should have its due share. Classes of people as
well as individuals were likely to be £4l6sh if they got all
the power into their own hands. Our constitution, with
its ins and outs, and what people might call its absurdities,
had contrived to stand for hundreds of years, and it was
remarked by Lord Macaulay that it had stood because the
people, when they wanted any improvement, did not look
about for any new-fangled fashions, but proceeded to get
what they wanted by the old ways. He believed that con- •
stitution afforded more liberty, more security for life and
property, than any other; and though he wished, if ho
' could, to amend it, he wished to do so by an extension of
its old principles. (Cheers.)
Mr. ROEBUCK—Sir, no one estimates morehighly than
I do the importance of the subject we are now discussing.
In the many years I have been in Parliament no such great
subject has occupied our attention. Other matters may
have had a momentary importance, but they have been cir-
cumscribed in point of time, and in the extent of their ope-
rations. But the alteration you seek now to effect is an altra-
tion in the constitution of this country. The acts of' this
house influence the destinies of the whole world, and there-
fore the act which we are now about considering is an act
that influences the happiness of mankind. This is why I
wish, if possible--not to put an end to this subject, for an end
to it we cannot put ; but I want to go forward. My object is
to obtain what reform I can ; and the question that I ask
myself is, in what way can I best obtain that reform ?
There is, sir, a matter now before the house, and that mat-
ter is twofold. What is it that we are about ? We are about
to reform the Reform Act. Then we have got two inquiries
to make—what is it that requires reform ? and, what means
shall we take to attain the end we desire ? Now, sir, I will
at once apply myself to those two matters ; and I have too
much respect for the house to occupy their attention for a
long time at this period of the debate ;-I will study brevity
as much as I can. The House of Commons, from the very
day of its establishment, has been in a state of constant
its
fluctuation and change. Now it has changed as regards
the persons who elect it. For many years
Lords.
own influence in the state; now it has
changtehdc"HoreuVo;
But
the
enus waoussethocii. tuardlss
I(t'ott ntdomthaiedraosef tlhveesiitohuespealtte of.