The Sun.
London, England, 1868-10-09 00:00:00

past, and asked them to be assured that his politi-
cal conduct in the past was an index of the present,
and should be his guide for the future. He would
only mention the subject of the day—the Irish
Church question. They should not be led away
by the stupid argument of those who professed to
represent the opinions of the Tory party, and who
said that, after the extinguishing of the Irish
Church, the next thing would be an attack on other
corporate property throughout the country. That
was an argument put forward on behalf of those
three gentlemen whom the present members were
to meet as their competitors. The electors
should not believe that argument. He regard-
ed the great measure of the disestablishment of the
Irish Church as a measure of absolute justice to
the Irish people. He reminded the electors that
unanimity must be their watchword. He would
like a man to give his vote where he had given it
before ; but necessity had arisen. They had a
difficult task before them, and that task must be
met. Therefore Le would ask his supporters nit to
regard him if he should by accident be in a better
Position on the poll than his present colleagues. It
had been his pleasure to act for many years with
Baron Rothschild, not so many with Mr. Goschen,
and fewer still with Mr. Lawrence; but during that

time, whenever his judgment was at fault, he
always had the benefit of their advice and co-ope-
ration. (Hear, hear.) People were in the habit of
estimating the value of their representatives by dif-
ferent standards. Some thought the value of a re-
presentative consisted in his sitting at the head of
the table at a charity dinner for benevolent tinkers ;
some thought be ought to be in the lobby of the
House of Commons, some in the divisions on a
Welsh Turnpike Bill, or an Irish Road Bill ; but
his own practice, if he saw fifty Irishmen on one
side with daggers drawn against fifty Irishmen on
the other, was to leave them to fight it out them-
selves. Therefore he did not value a member's ser-
vices by the number of times his name appeared in
the division list. There were many ways in which
a member could be of use to his constituents. Baron
Rothschild had recorded his vote on all questions in
which great principles were at stake, while, in the
position he held as the head of one of the greatest
firms in the country, his influence was felt, although
his name might not be seen in the division lists.
(Hear, hear.) He would only say, in concluding,
that better colleagues he could not wish to have.
Mr. GOSCHEN rejoiced that the time had come
when those who had the honour to represent the City
were once more about to meet a goodly number of
those whom they represent upon one of the political
questions of the day. City members were rather
badly off in that respect. They had not the same
opportunities as those who sit for provincial towns.
Therefore it was always a great satisfaction to them
when they were able to meet their constituents in

a body. True, they often enjoyed the hospitality
of the Mansion House, or those large City com-
panies that formed so large a body in London;
but, on those occasions, they met Conservatives and
Liberals together, and could not in courtesy allude
to vexed political questions. They did not meet
that day, he was sorry to say, in the usual way in
which members came before their constituents,
simply to give a statement of their political opinions;
but they were obliged to come to consider what
course to pursue in an emergency forced by a most
obnoxious clause in an Act of Parliament on the
citizens of London. They were called upon to solve
an arithmetical puzzle. They were obliged to go

into abstruse calculations to see what verdict should
be given on the questions of the day. That was a

_
great hardship. They were told this minority
clause was an experiment. Why had the City of
London and four or five of the largest towns in the
kingdom been selected? Why was it to be tried

just at that critical time in the history of England,
when the country was about to test the results of
the great Reform Bill? Why, it was done in order
that London might give a verdict which it would
not otherwise have given on one of the greatest
questions of the day. In other parts of the country,
while the struggle would lie between the two great
parties, they in London would have to sit down and
make all kinds of calculations. They were to be
experimentaliscd upon. He protested against it in
the House of Commons. It was not right that this
experiment should be tried in the City of London.
Why was it tried ? The Conservatives felt that the
nomination boroughs were in danger ; and, in order
to counterpoise that, they got the representation of
minorities. It would rest with the City of London
to say whether that should succeed. Would the
Conservatives think it successful if the Liberal
party were to abandon one of the four seats ?
Would they stand out in Parliament and say they
were glad there had not been a contest ? They

could—not say that the representation of great
cities is to be put into the hands of election com-
mittees, and that while a contest is going on
throughout the country it is to be a matter of ar-
rangement by election committees in great towns.
He did not think the Conservatives would say it
had been successful, because where minorities had
been introduced there had been no contest. What
would they think of a minority returning more
members than even their own theory leads them to
expect? It was alleged that the Conservatives said
it was possible that, by a mistake in the polling-
book, they might actually get two members out of
the four ; not because they were stronger than they
were before, but because they know how to manage
an election. lie maintained that the Conservative
minority of the City of London had got three of
the best men in Parliament to be beaten. They had
Mr. Baring, Mr. Hubbard, and Mr. Barnett, the
banker. The large cities were not fairly represented
in Parliament at the present moment. When they

looked at the great power of the landed interest,
and saw how few mercantile men there were in
Parliament, they would be astonished at the result.
But let London and the four other large towns re-
turn Liberal members, and they would hear no more
of minorities after that. (A laugh.) If England
were to retain her present Constitution they must
repeal that minority clause. If it led to personal
rather than local representation it would lead to
equal electoral districts if it led to anything, and the
Conservatives would be responsible for that. In their
general address the present members for the City
had put before them the fact that it would be their
duty to fight it out. It would be cowardly to sur-
render one seat. Supposing there was a small
minority, were they to give up then ? What
Parliament intended was that if there were three-
sevenths of Conservatives they should have a seat ;
but it could not be contended that if there were
only two sevenths they were to have a seat. That
clause was slipped into the Reform Bill at the end
of a session. It was adopted in deference to the
House of Lords, and to them was due the position
the constituencies are placed in at present. By
sinking all personal considerations, however, this
great battle in the city might possibly be won. He
trusted the Conservatives would find that a wrong
principle had been adopted, and that the clause
would be forthwith repealed. If he had the honour
to be returned he should do all in his power to re-
store
the franchise to its old footing.
Mr. LAWRENCE briefly addressed the meeting,
observing that by returning four Liberal members
to Parliament the City of London would strike a
blow at a system which is contrary to the principles
of the Constitution.

Mr. LOCKE, M.P., having, as an elector, ex-
pressed his confidence in the present members,
moved : "That, in pursuance of the foregoing
resolution, an address be issued to the citizens
of London in the name of that meeting,
and that the electors be respectfully invited to
become members of the committees of their re-
spective wards ; and that a central committee be
authorised and appointed to take all steps neces-
sary to secure the return of the sitting mem-
bers, who have already recorded their votes against
the act of disfranchisement, and are pledged to the
restoration of the ancient rights of their con-
stituents."

Mr. CHARLES REED, seconding, pointed out the
necessity for free communication between the cen-
tral and working committees.

The resolution was carried.

Mr. AYRTON, M.P., trusted the three Conserva-
tive candidates would furnish an illustration of the
representation of minorities by representing a ming-