it possible that there might be a better and delay before complying with their chance of obtaining Reform, now that the matter was no longer in the hands of the Government; who would be unable to carry any measure on the subject unless they were prepared to stand or fall by it. Their chance now lay in gaining instalments; and independent Members would, indeed, be in a forlorn position, unless they were able to carry measures bit by bit, which, in course of time, might form in the aggregate a great and satisfactory Reform Bill. He ought to mention that one part of the Bill which he proposed sought to adopt the suggestion which was made to him some years ago by the right hon. Gentleman below him (Sir James Graham), with regard to occupiers, to the effect that a portion of their holding, say to the extent of £5 or £6, should consist of a House. The absence of this provision was one of the objections made by the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for India, when explaining to his constituents in 1857 how he had managed to vote against the Bill; and he was now happy to obviate it by consenting to this alteration. It might, perhaps, have been better if the right hon. Gentleman on that occasion had consented to the introduction of the Bill, and had afterwards introduced the improvements, which he felt desirous to introduce, in Committee; but he was willing to let bygones be bygones, and to introduce a clause with the object he had stated. He hoped the House would support the Bill in the shape in which he now proposed it. Many of them were very apt he was afraid himself as much as any one-to condemn the acts of despotic rulers on the Continent because they refused to give political rights to their people. But he really thought those rulers acted a comparatively bold and noble part. They told their people boldly and frankly, that they were not fit to enjoy those rights, He thought, however, that the House, with regard to the political rights of the people of England, were acting a somewhat mean and timid part. They flattered the people who sought to be enfranchised, and told them that they were perfectly fit for it-that it was part of their constitutional right-nothing was more settled than that political fitness ought to be followed by political rightsthat where electoral capacity existed their electoral rights ought to follow. They told the people this-told them they were fit, and then invented every kind of excuse

just demands. Thus, in a free country, a greater act of despotism was absolutely committed than in countries which were professedly despotic. He hoped the House would consent to the introduction of the Bill; and he was persuaded the words would be verified which were used by the noble Lord the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, when he fought so ably for this very measure in 1857-that it would tend not only to improve, but also to consolidate our institutions, and to give stability to our electoral system. The hon. Member concluded by moving for leave to bring in a Bill to extend the Franchise in Counties in England and Wales.

Motion made, and Question proposed. MR. WARNER asked the indulgence of the House while he endeavoured in as few words as possible to state the reasons which had led him, and he believed might lead others, to prefer the Amendment standing in his name, [That a Select Committee be appointed to consider what changes it may be desirable to introduce with a view to amend the Representation of the People] to the Motion at present before the House. Towards the end of last Session, when it became evident that Ministers were not prepared to make a declaration of their policy in reference to Reform, he had thought it his duty to give notice that, early in the present Session, he would move the appointment of a Select Committee to enquire into the whole question. As this notice must necessarily compete in some respects with those given by other Members, he had thought it would be more convenient to place it in the form of an Amendment to the first of those which stood upon the paper; and this happened to be the Motion of the hon. Member for East Surrey. As there had been a great deal of misrepresentation out of doors, he wished to state, in the most explicit manner possible, that he entertained no objection to the Motion of the hon. Member. He had not one word to say either against his arguments or his facts; he had voted for his Motion on a former occasion, and saw no reason why he should not vote for it again. With a great deal of what had fallen from the hon. Member be perfectly agreed, thongh, perhaps, in some respects, he had come to different conclusions. There was no reason why a £10 householder in the country should not be equally capable of giving an intelligent and satisfactory vote with a £10 householder in the

town; and he should be glad to extend to it an honour to be classed as one of the them the privilege of the franchise. But remnant of that great party who still he could not think it desirable that the maintained its unshaken faith in the posenergies of Reformers should be wasted, sibility and the need of Reform; but he now that they were thrown on their indi- could not disguise from himself that they vidual responsibility, by bringing forward were placed in great difficulty, and that Motions which did not contain the germ of they ought to act discreetly as well as ena possibility of success. Let them decide ergetically. He agreed with much that some one point of paramount importance had been said by his hon. Friend (Mr. to the country and they would then have a Locke King) in favour of his Motion, and better chance of carrying it. For his own in much of the blame which he rather impart he infinitely preferred the Motion of plied than charged against the noble Lord. which notice had been given by his hon. the Secretary for Foreign Affairs. He did Friend the Member for Leeds (Mr. Baines), not think that the course which the noble and he should very cordially give his vote Lord indicated on the first night of the in its favour. The proposition of his hon. Session, or, still more, the language in Friend the Member for East Surrey had which he expressed his intentions, would one great fault, perhaps the greatest of be satisfactory to the country or advanall faults, the fault of misfortune. The tageous to the Government. In one thing, hon. Member himself had taken some pains however, he believed the noble Lord was to explain to the House the disappoint- unjustly blamed; for he was of opinion ments he had suffered in connection with that he had exercised a wise discretion it. It had already acquired a conspicuous in not attempting to introduce in the preplace in Parliamentary history; it had done sent Session anything resembling the uneverything a Bill could do, except pass. It fortunate measure which came last year to had disturbed the country; it had impeded an untimely and unhonoured end. When legislation; it had led to one or two disso- that Bill was dropped its fall did not seem Jutions and some half-a-dozen changes of to affect the country; but the noble Lord Ministry; and, further than that, it had himself clung to it long after it had been been the parent of a large family of Re- abandoned by the people and their repreform Bills, which had all died young. It sentatives. Hon. Members would recollect was ten years since his hon. Friend achieved what he might call, for convenience of rea great and unexpected success,-but, as ference, "Northampton Manifesto." The far as the people of England were con- hon. Member for Northampton (Mr. Gilpin) cerned, nothing came of it. Then in due having occasion to visit his constituents, was succession there followed no less than four permitted to state to them that the noble Reform Bills-grand, comprehensive, Go- Lord (Lord John Russell) was conditionvernment Bills, but nothing came of them. ally prepared to bring in a Bill which, in And what was remarkable was this, that the main, would be similar to the Bill of most of those Bills, if not all, embodied last Session; but, added the hon. Member the principle of his hon. Friend's measure. for Northampton, You must agitate the The noble Lord the Foreign Secretary in- question; the country must support the troduced it into two or three of his Bills; Government by public meetings and numeand then the great Reformers, Messrs. Bax- rous petitions,' What had been the reter, Rose, and Company, very respectable sult? There had not been one public solicitors, appropriated it in theirs. And, meeting held in favour of a Bill which he said it in all seriousness, the reason should be similar in the main to the last. why those measures failed was, he believed, They all knew how easy it was to get up chiefly because they adopted the principle petitions; yet not one petition had been of his hon. Friend. For, if there was one presented-not one man of the six unentruth more than another which the dis- franchised millions had thought the noble cussions of past years had brought promi- Lord's Bill worth asking for. He must do nently to light, it was this, that the chief the noble Lord justice, and could not blame obstacle to an extension of the franchise him for not renewing the experiment of was the dead uniform level of our quali- last Session; but there were other courses fication. The work of Reformers should open to him. He might have proceeded be to break up that level, rather than to by Resolution; he might have moved for extend and unite those hard lines which a Select Committee, or he might have at present existed, one for the towns and framed a measure more in accordance with the other for the counties. He considered the wants of the year 1861 than in strict

46

way of extending the franchise arose from the great, wise, and beneficent changes which of late years we had made in our financial policy. It was perfectly clear that with free trade we must have a system of direct taxation. Our direct taxation, which was now only in its infancy, rested on a broad basis of exemptions, embracing a large part of the population; and it had been argued with some appearance of fairness that if the franchise, on its present system, was extended in any considerable degree, the exemptions from taxation remaining as now, we should soon arrive at the point where the right of making the laws would be practically severed from the obligation of paying the taxes. But supposing that Parliament should dispense with the rate book as a test altogether, and go back to the more ancient and complete principle of household suffrage, accompanied with that most reasonable and constitutional condition that exemption from taxation should disqualify to vote, could any one imagine that the character of the constituencies would be injured. He believed their quality would be greatly improved. Those who were most afraid of the extension of popular rights might be reassured from the knowledge that all who voted shared a proportionate respon sibility. They would establish a better qualification on a self-acting basis, and its future extension might be left to the ingenuity and the necessities of Chancellors of the Exchequer. From various reasons he had been induced to think that some of the difficulties of this question were not to be dealt with summarily in that House, but that inquiry before a Select Committee was necessary, in order to see how these difficulties could be best smoothed over, and a Reform Bill introduced that would be satisfactory to the country. The hon. and learned Member for Mary

conformity with the principles of the Bill | level remained. Another difficulty of 1832. The noble Lord might have taken one of those courses; but, instead, he threw up the whole subject into the hands of independent Members. But the question for independent Members now was, not what the noble Lord ought to have done, but what they ought to do themselves. He thought there might be a little more consultation and arrangement among the Liberal Members before they introduced isolated measures to the House. They ought to measure their own strength before they brought in Bills. They must remember that they were but the remnant of a great party. Two years ago there was a great Liberal party in that House-a great exulting party-which spurned Lord Derby's Reform Bill, and which followed the noble Lord the Member for the City of London into the lobby on that memorable night when, it would now appear, he saved his country in vain. When they measured their own strength, knew what they were able to accomplish, and saw what particular sort of Reform the country demanded, and what were the objections that would be taken to it, then they would be able to effect something. He could not agree with his hon. Friend that what he proposed was the measure most desired by the country. Within the last week he himself had presented thirteen petitions, all from Norwich, and all from working men, claiming the franchise for their class; but he had yet to learn that the Bill of his hon. Friend (Mr. L. King) would introduce any large number of working men into the constituencies. He should prefer the Bill of his hon. Friend the Member for Leeds (Mr. Baines), which would do something in that direction. Whatever difference of opinion might prevail on the subject of Reform, the country seemed to be agreed in this that an electoral body comprising only about one in seven of the adult male population was a wholly inadequate founda-lebone (Mr. Edwin James), he undertion for popular institutions; and that the class which most wanted to be included was the working class; because it was in no sense properly represented in that House at present, while every other class was. At the same time the country was equally determined not to submit to any revolutionary scheme. He was not opposed to a wide extension of the suffrage, but was against any system of franchise which would rest on a uniform rating level, and he believed that it would be impossible to carry any Reform Bill so long as such a

stood, took occasion the other night, after comparing independent Members in that House to the successors of Alexander, to raise a laugh at the idea of referring the Constitution of England, as he said, to a Select Committee. He would like to ask the hon. and learned Gentleman, who was so well acquainted with ancient history, whether he had never heard of Constitutions of free States that were submitted with eminent success to the consideration, not of Select Committees, but of individual Legislators? The hon. and learned Gen

that questions of Reform should be left exclusively in the hands of the Government, and he thought it safer, if they were so particularly anxious for Reform, to adopt "bit by bit Reform,' rather than wait for a great measure like that of 1832, which was no longer practical. The hon. Gentleman who brought forward this Motion was in precisely the same position as he was ten years ago. Practically, his Bill was the same as the one he then introduced. He admitted that he had long been of opinion that the £50 franchise in counties was susceptible of modification, but not to the extent proposed by the hon. Member. To the statement that the House had ever sanctioned the £10 franchise for counties he felt it his duty to give a flat denial, for at the time the hon. Member succeeded in getting his Bill read a second time-it was by a mere juggle—there were only about 150 Members present, and those who sat on the Conservative side were nearly all absent; whereas on the next stage the House rejected the Bill by a majority of 200. The sudden passing of the second reading, therefore, could not be called an expression of the opinion of the House. In 1852 a Reform Bill was brought in by the Government; but that Bill did not in any way sanction uniformity of franchise, and, indeed, no Bill introduced by the noble Lord had ever recognized the principle of uniformity of the county and borough franchise. In 1857 the hon. Gentleman brought forward a Motion for the equalization of the franchise in counties and boroughs; but that Bill was negatived by a large majority, and on that occasion the noble Lord at the head of the Govern. ment spoke very strongly against it—it was impossible that any man could speak in a spirit of more determined opposition than did the noble Lord. After the Derby Government came into power the Member for East Surrey introduced a Bill for a large extension of the franchise, having very much the same effect as the present. In the year 1859, while sitting on the opposite benches, and presumably a sup

tleman, he understood, ridiculed all Motions by independent Members on the subject of Reform, and contended that the introduction of such measures should be left to the Government; but he (Mr. Warner) hoped the hon. and learned Member would enlighten the House as to how he proposed to awaken the dormant sense of responsibility in the Ministers of the Crown. Before concluding, he wished to give expression to one word of earnest but respectful remonstrance to the noble Lord the Secretary for Foreign Affairs. The noble Lord had said that one of his reasons for doing nothing this Session was, that there was no popular cry in the country for Reform-no strong gale of popular favour to carry a Bill over the bar of the House of Lords. In his opinion, that was the strongest possible reason why he should set earnestly to work immediately to arrange for the earliest possible passing of a satisfactory Reform Bill. If the subject was to have a calm, temperate, and dispassionate consideration, it would receive it in present circumstances, and not when the strong wind of which the noble Lord spoke would be blowing over the land. He gave the noble Lord all honour for the skill and the boldness with which he steered through the surf in the great storm of thirty years ago; but let him recollect was the escape then made from a disastrous shipwreck, not of his party only, but of constitutional Government and of the Monarchy itself. He still believed that the question of reform would be best dealt with by a Select Committee, but he had consulted with those whose opinion he valued, and he understood there was a general feeling in the House that the Bill of his hon. Friend (Mr. L. King) should be judged upon its own merits. He would postpone his Amendment for the present, and bring it forward as a substantive Motion on a future day. He would vote for the Motion of his hon. Friend, not believing that it would have any practical result, but because he thought that discussion on Reform was of all things needed, and that, whatever tended to dis-porter of Lord Derby's Government, he cussion might indirectly lead to good.

how narrow

MR. DARBY GRIFFITH, in rising to move an Amendment to the effect that it is inexpedient to equalize the country or borough franchise, or to reduce the county franchise below £20, said, that unlike the hon. Gentleman who had just sat down, it was his fixed intention to proceed to a division. He did not think it at all necessary

(Mr. Griffith) dissented from an equalization of the franchise, and he thought it his duty to put a trying question to the right hon. Member for Buckinghamshire. On the 28th March he asked the then Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the principle of uniformity of franchise in boroughs and counties was one on which the fate of their Bill hung?

What

Amendment proposed

"To leave out from the word 'That' to the end

of the Question, in order to add the words, considering that the object of the proposed Bill inhas generally been considered as opposed to the volves the practical adoption of a principle which spirit of our Parliamentary constitution—namely, the uniformity of the county and borough franchise-it is not expedient to reduce the county franchise below £20."

was the answer of the right hon. Gentle- | for it; and it was a noble characteristic of man? After some humorous allusions as independent Members of that House, that, to the wholesale and retail manner in whether right or wrong, they were ready which the question had been debated, the to do that. The right hon. Gentleman right hon. Gentleman said, in most reason told his constituents they would have got a able language, that if the Bill went into better Bill from the Derby Government Committee he should, on the part of the than from the present Ministry. From Government, listen to any proposition that the Derby Government they got a Bill might be made with respect to any of the which might have been amended in Comclauses, from whatever quarter it might mittee; but from the present Government come, in that spirit of candour that be- they got no Bill at all. He would tell the came a Government. It could not, there- Conservative party that this was the time fore, be alleged that that Government was to finish a matter of this kind. Do not obstinately wedded to any particular view. let them wait for another revolution like He (Mr. Griffith) had given notice of a that of 1832; but let them make reasonMotion in Committee to fix the county able concessions while they could, before franchise at £20; but owing to the Bill the waves rose and the wind howled. The not reaching the Committee he had not hon. Member concluded by moving his been able to state his reasons in favour of Amendment. that proposition. The truth was, that the country did not support the Liberal party in their endeavours after Reform; and hon. Gentlemen opposite were perfectly aware of that, and the fact was hinted at in the letter which the right hon. Member for Portsmouth (Sir Francis Baring) had addressed to his constituents, in which he recommended them to take what they could get, and fall back upon "bit by bit" Reform. It was for the interest of the Conservative Members to close this matter, and not to give the noble Lord the Member for London the opportunity of jerking the matter forward at any time he might think expedient. The House knew that many Members of the Liberal party were disappointed at not obtaining office, as they expected, when the present Government came into power. He said to one of them, Why, you do not expect Lord John Russell to be Prime Minister, do you?" "Yes, to be sure,' was the reply, and if we had known what the result would be we would never have put you out." The noble Lord bad maintained such close relations with so many of the advanced Members of the Liberal party when he sat below the gangway, that there was no Liberal who sat behind the noble Lord who would deny that his party expected to come into office on the shoulders of Reform. Why, look at the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Horsman. [Laughter.] He (Mr. Griffith) was sure the right hon. Gentle man would agree with him in that view. Every one must admire the pluck and gallantry with which-whether right or wrong the right hon. Gentleman had faced his constituents the other day. The right hon. Gentleman deserved great credit

66

66

CAPTAIN JERVIS seconded the Amendment.

Question proposed, "That the words. proposed to be left out stand part of the Question."

MR. NEWDEGATE: I must say that I have heard with regret that the hon. Member for Norwich (Mr. Warner) intends to withdraw his Amendment, for it happens that the propriety of the proposal made by the hon. Member for East Surrey, namely the reduction of the franchise in counties to £10, is one of those propositions which have, for a length of time, been taken for granted with no sufficient ground for that assumption—it has been assumed that this House has consented to it, and very diverse conclusions have been drawn from that supposed fact. I have been looking this day at the evidence taken before the House of Lords' Committee on this subject. Their inquiry went fully into the effect of the reduction proposed by the noble Lord the Member for London in his Bill of last year upon the borough franchise, but scarcely any inquiry was instituted into the effect of the proposed reduction of the county franchise to £10. There was some evidence, however, to which I may refer, and most important evidence it was; it was the evi