The Sun.
London, England, 1861-02-20 00:00:00

VOTE BY BALLOT.

Mr. H. BERKELEY gave noticeof his intention to ask
this day fortnight for leave to bring in a bill for the better
protection of electors in voting for members of Parlia-
ment.

FOREIGN AFFAIRS.
Mr. P. HENNESSY gave notice that on the motion
for the adjournment of the house on Friday week he would
call the attention of the house to the interference of the
Clovernment in the affairs of Italy, and the effect of such
interference.

QUEENSLAND, AUSTRALIA.
Mr. MARSH asked the Under Secretary for the Colo-
nies, whether it was the intention of the Government to
lay upon the table of the house the despatches of Sir Geo.
Bowen, Governor of Queensland, Australia ?
Mr. C. FORTESCUE said it was not the practice to
produce such documents, but in the present case an excep-
tion would be made, and the despatches in question would
be laid on the table.
POOR LAW OFFICERS.
Mr. P. WATLINGTON asked the President of the
Poor Law Bond whether it was his intention to introduce
any bill this session to provide for superannuation allow-
ances to poor law officers of unions and parishes ?
Mr. VILLIERS said that a committee had been ap-
pointed to consider all questions relating to the Poor Law,
and this amongst other subjects would be submitted to
their consideration.

DELIVERY OF IRISH LETTERS.
Mr. BRADY asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland if his
attention had been directed to the fact that Irish letters,
arriving at the General Post-office, London, at 7 o'clock in
the morning, were there detained, and not delivered before
the second delivery (even so late as 12 o'clock, a.m.) I'
Mr. CARD WELL explained that the delay in question
was caused by the tempestuous state of the weather during
the last two months, which prevented the arrival of the
Irish mail in time to be delivered by the first post ; but,
with the exception of a few instances, Irish letters were
delivered by the second post.

COUNTY FRANCHISE.
Mr. L. KING rose to move for leave to bring in a bill to
extend the franchise in counties in England and Wales.
He said he had hoped that after the occurrences of the lust
two years in reference to the subject of Parliamentary
reform, it would not have been necessary for
him to have to bring this subject forward on the
present occasion. However, as there was no Reform Bill
entertained by Government, and no allusion to reform
in the speech from the Crown, he thought that the present
was a fitting opportunity to bring forward his measure as
an instalment of reform. Many persons in the country I
think that Reform should not be attempted in the shape of
a comprehensive measure, but that they should en
deavour to accomplish it in detail. (Hear, hear.)
In conformity with that opinion, he considered that it was
desirable that he should introduce the present bill for the
purpose of extending the franchise in counties to £lO
occupiers, the effect of which would be to augment largely
the existing constituency in counties, and admit to the
exercise of the franchise a class who were competent to use the
privilege conferred on them with advantage to the consti-
tution of the country. In support of his motion, he ad-
verted to the fact that the principle on which he based his
proposed 'bill had been already recognised even by those
who had been formerly opposed to it, as was shown by the
measure of reform introducedby Lord Derby's Government.
That bill, however, presented the principle for which he
contended in so mutilated a form that he felt bound to
oppose it; and, in consequence of that mutilation, it was
rejected, the noble lord (Lord Derby) was deprived of the
confidence of the country, and his party driven
out of power. Having censured the noble
lord the Foreign!Secretary for the course he had adopted in
reference to reform this year, he concluded by quoting the
noble lord's words in favour of reform on a former occasion.
Mr. WARNER, who had the following amendment on
the paper :—" That a select committee be appointed
to consider what changes it may be desirable to
introduce with a view to amend the represen-
tation of the people," said he had no objection
to the principle of the £lO franchise in the bill of his hon.
friend (Mr. Locke King), but at the same time he believed
that its adoption was the reason why no measure on
reform had been successful in the recent attempts that had
been made to legislate on the subject. (Hear, hear.) He
concurred with his hon. friend in his censure of the noble
lord, the Foreign Secretary, whose conduct he considered
was injurious to himself and to his party. At the came
time, however, he thought the noble lord was unjustly
blamed for not bringing forward some measure similar to
that of last year. There were no petitions in fa-
vour of such a measure, and even the unenfranchised
whom it proposed to benefit had made no demon-
stration in its favour. But there were other
courses open to the noble lord which he might have pur-
sued with credit to himself and advantage to the country.
He (Lord J. Russell) might have proceeded by resolution,
as he had done so successfully on former occasions, and
move for a select committee to form a bill
on the subject of the franchise. He objected
to the proposed bill of the hon. member (Mr. Locke King),
on the ground that it proposed a fixed ground for the pos-
session of the franchise, which he considered impolitic. L.
his opinion, any reform bill, to be efficient, chould be
founded on the necessities of 18G1, sus not in conformity
with an adherence to the principles of the Reform Bill
a 136 Z. He thought the best course would
be to leave the matter to be dealt with
by the independent members of the hone. At the
same time they should remember that they (Reform mem-
bers) were a mere remnant, and not as the were tw-
years ago, a powerful party. (Hear, hear, from the
cOapuptioosnz
lion benches.) They should therefore proceed Ncrniiiith
only one
He drew attention to the fact that notwietheretansen
j, still the
out of seven of the constituencies wthasinrg
y • like revolutionary
general feeling was opposed
change. The hon. melbertocoannauded by stating that he
amendment, but bring it forward
would not then moveash
on a future occasion as Is substantive motion.
moved the following amendment :
Mrr D. GRI
.F
"That, considering- that the object of. the. proposed. bill in-
volvesp actical adoption of a principle which has ge-
thebnrconsierd as opposed to the spirit of our Par-
anermaentary constitution, namely, the uniformity of the
06unty and borough franchise, it is not expedient to reduce
the county franchise below £20."
He considered that it was most desirable the house should
make reasonable concessions to a desire for the extension of
the suffrage ; at the same time he considered the alteration
proposed ley the hon. member (Mr. L. King) was too ex-
tensive to be carried out with safety.
Captain JERVIS seconded the amendment.
Mr. NEWDEGATE, referring to the conflicting esti.
mates of the number of electors which thisimeasure would
add to the county ooastituency, and observing that of all
changes this was the one respecting the effects of which the
house was least informed, insisted that it would be most
imprudent to adopt an isolated measure on this great sub-
ject. Instead of increasing the representation of the opera-
tive classes it would aggralate tho anomalynow complained