England.] HISTORY. liamentary Reform, and, to some The motion of Lord Grey was, only to know the number of those political rights, he should not hold such an opinion, but in the present state of the law there was no industrious man in a borough who might not expect to hold a 101. house. There was also an indirect influence which a man of character who had no vote could exert upon those who had, who were always ready to support the interests of the unrepresented. It was impossible to give the poorer classes a larger share of the franchise without giving them a complete predominance. The Committee he asked for would not have to form plans for a Reform Bill, but to assist their lordships in obtaining information which would enable them properly to discuss the Reform Bill of the Government when it came before them. The principles on which they ought to proceed to accomplish a safe and effectual improvement had not yet been discovered, and he was sure that Parliament could not properly deal with this momentous question before some such inquiry had been made. The subject ought to receive a dispassionate discussion. He should deeply regret to see passed, for the mere sake of concession, such a measure as would unsettle all and settle nothing. Unless the question ceased to be the battlefield of party, and the leaders of party had sufficient patriotism to agree either to leave the representation as it was-and after all there was but little practical objection to its working or else to endeavour to concur in devising and carrying some measure framed in accordance with the dictates of political wisdom and experience, and not with the mere view of patching up for a time a troublesome and difficult question-unless this was more done, there was, in his opinion, danger of an overthrow of the balance of the Constitution, and the establishment of an unchecked democracy. The institutions of the United States ought to be a warning beacon to us. The extraordinary abuses which had sprung up under the representative system of the United States-corruption, violence, the advantage of the many sacrificed to the interests of the few, the exclusion of the educated and wealthy from every department of official life, an arrogance in dealing with foreign nations, a false system of finance— were not calculated to invite that imitation of it which its English admirers advocated. Passing to the direct question before the House, he concluded by observing that he was not one of those who thought the Act of 1832 necessarily final, and it was in order to know what numbers and what classes would be admitted that he moved for a Select Committee. The Duke of Argyll was perfectly willing that the returns should be referred to a Select Committee, on the distinct understanding that it was not to be a means for completely shelving the measure before the nation. He defended the returns from the inaccuracies imputed to them by individual members, and stated that the Government had taken particular care to have the returns verified in those boroughs in which they were alleged to have been incorrect, and that the verification had proved the accuracy of the returns and the untruth of the allegations against them. He could not allow the analogy implied by Lord Grey between the institutions of the United States and the changes proposed by the new Bill England.] ment. HISTORY. The new to pass uncontradicted. Bill neither adopted the Ballot nor Universal Suffrage. Confessing his surprise at the sudden change in the opinions of Lord Grey, who in 1852 had supported Lord John Russell's measure, which reduced the borough franchise to within 208. of the amount proposed by the present Bill, he could only account for it on the supposition that the speculations of persons in isolated positions were very different from those of the same persons when shackled by the responsibility of an official appointHe then considered the Reform Bill of Mr. Disraeli, which, in his opinion, had never met with adequate justice, but the fault of which was that it made no alteration in the borough franchise, and the premature fate of which was due not so much to its oppoIf, as was nents as to its parents. asserted by the Conservative party, the tendencies of the lower classes were conservative, why had the Conservatives so great a horror of an extension of the franchise? He proceeded to contend that the 61. householder of the new Reform Bill would be as well calculated to exercise the franchise as the small shopkeeper, who was less independent than the working man. He agreed with Lord Grey in hoping that this question would be settled by the present Bill, as he saw no prospect of finding a better opportunity for its discussion than the present. Lord Derby repelled the attack made by the Duke of Argyll upon Lord Grey's consistency, and proceeded to state the course taken by his own Government in the matter of Parliamentary Reform, and the reasons by which he was induced He would to take that course. not, he said, remind the House of from the House-that they would proceed with the Bill whatever should be the decision of the Committee. He should regret if the House should reject a measure sent up by the House of Commons, or even make such amendments in it as might endanger it elsewhere; yet if the Bill came up in its present form he should feel it his duty to oppose it as the most unsatisfactory, unstatesmanlike, and inconclusive measure which had ever been submitted to Parliament. He then proceeded to consider the number of those who would be admitted by the extension of the borough franchise, and showed that the result would be to throw the taxation of the country into the hands of those who believed that the upper classes were keeping up a large national expenditure for their own benefit, and would be giving the democratic element a vast preponderance in the constitution. He hoped the measure of the Government would not be pressed upon the country before the Committee had sat and finished its labours. In conclusion, he warned the House against the consequences of the present Bill, which would gradually prepare the way to lower and lower qualifications, ending in universal suffrage, would be dangerous to the balance of the constitution, and might ultimately sweep away their Lordships' House and the monarchy of the kingdom. Lord Granville, after vindicating the Duke of Argyll from the attacks of Lord Derby, said that the Government would go into the Committee for the purpose of giving those who disbelieved in the accuracy of the returns the opportunity of discovering that the Government had not based its calcu lations on insufficient data. He considered that the present time was the most opportune for allow ing this Bill to pass, and pointed out that the language used by Lord Derby would give support to the assertions made out of doors by Mr. Bright that the Bill would not pass through the House of Lords for two or three sessions. He did not agree with Mr. Bright's assertion, because he knew it was the wish of their lordships to do all in their power to give stability to the institutions of the country. He Lord Grey explained at some length to the House the reasons by which he had been induced to assent to Lord John Russell's Bill of 1852, and freely acknowledged at the same time that it was a mistake on his part to do so. then contrasted the circumstances of the present time and those of 1832, and contended that they were entirely different; in the one case there was great public excitement, while at the present moment there was nothing in the public feeling to urge forward the measure before the House with undue haste. The motion was then agreed to, and a Committee was appointed. The Ministers had appointed the 4th of June for going into Committee on the Reform Bill in the House of Commons, a date which afforded little prospect of getting so much-contested a measure through its several stages in that House and afterwards allowing time for its passage through the House of Lords. Notice had been given of many amendments to be proposed at this stage, and it was evident that the progress of the Bill must be very slow and much impeded by opposition and delay. Several honourable mem bers had announced their intention of moving instructions to the Committee on the Bill to make provision for matters relating to the representation which the Bill did not include,-such as the prevention of bribery and corruption, increased facilities for polling, &c.; but these were withdrawn upon an intimation from the Speaker that they could not be moved consist ently with the forms and orders of the House. In moving that the Speaker do leave the Chair, Lord John Russell stated the course which the Government proposed to take with respect to the three Reform Bills. In their opinion, the English Bill should go into Committee and its provisions be assented to by Parliament before the other Bills were consider ed, and it was not to be expected that the Scotch and Irish Bills, under those circumstances, could be proceeded with this session. With regard to the English Bill, two questions arose, one as to the substance of the measure, and the other as to the time when it was proposed to proceed with it. In respect to the first question, the Government had proposed a franchise for the boroughs which they did not think lower than it was proper to carry it; but this was a question of degree, and he was therefore justified in asking the House to go into Committee, when any propositions for amending the Bill could be fairly considered. If the reduction of the franchise were objected to, the House should not have assented to the second reading. With respect to the question of time, it was to be proposed to wait the results of the Census, but this would postpone a Reform Bill for three years, which was equivalent to putting it off indefinitely upon a very hollow pretence. Then it was said that this was the 4th of June, and it was too late to proceed with the Bill, considering that the Estimates had not passed the House. Looking at the importance of this Bill, however, this, he thought, was no reason for not proceeding with it, and, if the Government alleged this reason, it would be attributed to a desire to get rid of the Bill without the manliness to avow it. No time was fixed for the prorogation of Parliament, and, if important business was before them, there was no reason why their sittings should not be prolonged. Mr. Disraeli vindicated the fairness and consistency of his party in relation to the measure, observing that the policy which Lord John had recommended that night was in most strange and startling contrast to that which he had recommended from the Opposition benches, and to the tone and temper with which the Bill had been introduced. He pointed out the difficulties and embarrassments which would attend the course the Government proposed to adopt. If the English Bill only was to be proceeded with, was there to be a partial dissolution of Parliament, or must that House meet as a condemned House of Commons, the English members not competent to their duties? Meanwhile that was going on which should excite the anxiety and engage the deep attention of the country; and was that a period when the House should be left in the state which Lord J. Russell contemplated? In his opinion, it was most impolitic at this moment to attempt such a settlement of this question as that undertaken by |