The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1906-12-30


be insured. the committee thought. by the
extension OF the elective franchise In them
to all h~ouseholders rated at e2o per annum
This, as we nave said, was the figure which
was demanded by Lord John Russell, and
to which Durham temporarily agreed by
way OF compromise. Subsequently, how
ever. the committee discovered that q go
franchise would greatly restrict the number
Of electors in small boroughs. and therefore
In the end adopted n uniform suffrage
based on a el0 yearly rate. As regards
the redistribution Of seats, the committee
proposed TO grant representatives to all
large and populous towns Of more than
10000 Inhabitants, Of which there were then
unrepresented in England about thirty.
The committee likewise recommended that
additional members should be given to
electoral divisions whose population
amounted to more than s 1900. Finally,
the duration Of Parliament was TO be limited
to Ave years, which also was a compromise,
Durham having desired triennial assemblies.
II ia well known that the statutory term OF
Parliament was eventually fixed at seven
years. On the whole, Durham did not re-
gard the measure, vast and sweeping though
the changes were which it aimed to effect,
as perfect, and he did not conceal his chagrin
when the Cabinet, in Difference TO the hos
tility OF William w. and the apprehensions
Of Lord Grey, struck out the ballot from
the scheme.
v.
The tug OF war began with the intro
duction OF the Reform bill in February,
1881, and Lord Durham, as much as any
man, bore the brunt OF the battle. The
second reading Of the measure in the House
Of Commons was carried by a majority OF
only one in the fullest House on record.
Five days thereafter Durham seized the
opportunity of defending the bill from his
place in the House of Lords. On April IS,
however, the Grey Ministry was beaten in
the House of Commons on a Tory motion
to amend the bill and Parliament was dis
solved. In the ensuing campaign the popu-
lar cry was the bill, the whole bill and
nothing but the BILL Even in the agri-
cultural districts the ascendency Of the old
landed families was powerless to arrest
the flowing tide. Lord Grey obtained an
overwhelming vote of confidence at the
polls. Out of eighty-two county members
only six were avowedly hostile to the Reform
bill. Scarcely had the new Parliament met
when Lord John Russell introduced the
second Reform bill, which was substantially
identical with the first. It quickly passed
through it's initial stages, and the third
reading was carried in the Commons on
September p, 1881, by a majority of l09.
All through the anxious weeks of that
summer of political unrest Durham when
-. !. L. Z. nz--.-- $1,000
was in Brighton, where his eldest son was
slowly dying Of consumption. The respect
with which Lord Durham was regarded by
the people OF his countryside may be meas
ured by the tribute paid 10 one who was little
more than a child, 10000 people taking
part in the funeral ceremonies.
On October 8, 1881, the House OF Lords
threw out the Reform bill by a majority Of
forty-one, which included twenty-one
Bishops. Durham saw clearly enough at
once that nothing short of a threat to create
a batch of new peers sufficient 20 turn the
scale would be Of the least avail. To this
course, however, Lord Grey was for a time
resolutely opposed. Beyond any other
member Of the Cabinet, Durham possessed
imagination and courage. He knew the
temper of the peers, the intrigues of the
court, the dull apathy Of the landed inter-
est and all the subtle forces in society which
were in conspiracy against the just de-
mands of the people. He knew also the
actual trend OF public opinion and recoG-
nized that it was useless, as well as unjust,
to attempt anything in the nature Of a
compromise.
Mean while the Reform bill, which Lord
John Russell had introduced on December
IL, for the third time in twelve months,
a bill substantially the same as its two
predecessors, had passed its second read
ing in the Commons before the Christmas
recess. On March %, 1882, the third read
ing was carried by a majority Of ll8. The
measure was promptly sent up to the Lords.
Durham's speech on the second reading
of the Reform bill in he upper house on
April IS, 1892. was memorable. The speech
made a great impression in the chamber,
undoubtedly opening the eyes Of some
vacillating peers to the gravity of the crisis.
The second reading was carried on April IL,
but it was foreseen that the real struggle
would he in committee. When the bill
reached the committee stage, on May 7,
a hostile motion made by Lore Lyndhurst
was carried by a majority Of IS. Mean
while LOfu DuTndIh ndu WOu ONtI bOTu
Althorp TO the view that the moment had
come for a large creation Of peers, and
the two between them eventually over
came Lord Grey's reluctance 70 recir 20
that expedient. TIL Ministers now deter
mined, in Lord Durham's words, that a
-suf icient creation Of peers was absolutely
necessary" il their resignation was not
to take immediate effect. They promptly
submitted their decision to King William ~,
but met with a chilling reception. On
the next day the King accepted Lord Grey's
resignation and sent for the Duke of Well
ington. Wellington, much against his
will, attempted TO form a Ministry to carry
out some emasculated scheme OF reform.
but Peel's refusal 10 cooperate with him
rendered his task hopeless. The King
yielded. Exactly two days after
the defeat Of the Government in the House
OF Lords he sent for Lord Grey. Never
theless, William ". let down the upper
chamber gracefully. He authorized the
creation Of new peers II necessary to save
the measure, but at the same time adj
dressed an earnest letter to the recalcitrants
urging them TO withdraw their opposition.
When the measure was again introduced