On this page
-
Text (1)
-
* July 12, 1&51.] SEP* SUflftlt* 647 ^
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
M, Parliament Of * The Week. The House O...
— T ^ TToots , and to render the workhouse as -distasteful oU « ihle Then , under these circumstances , could it fffiabl ' e to employ persons on a farm or garden b « . rhed to the workhouse , and to give them better food , f £ and shelter than the independent labourer could C > ' Such a system , he did not hesitate to say was Sdv opposed to the workhouse test , and would be a en t fatal one to adopt . He warned Irish gentlemen iX ? no temporary advantage which they might gain « m a deduction of rates for the time would countervail Soss which would be inflicted on the labourer and the Steoavew , if they abandoned the principle of making Se woffiu se test as severe and distasteful as possible . ( Hear , hear . )' Mr Hbni-ey pertinently replied that nothing could be more dangerous for Ireland than to break down the workhouse test ; but he could not understand by what connection of terms employing persons within
the workhouse necessarily destroyed the labour test , for he could see no difference in the principle whether a man employed in picking oakum did it in such a manner as that it should be reproductive , or that it should be worth nothing . { Hear , hear . ) Mr . Labouchere said , what was to a great extent true , that every gentleman who intended to support the motion seemed anxious to explain away its obvious meaning . " He certainly thought that whatever temporary relief might be given to the ratepayers by making the Irish poorhouses a colossal workshop , the ultimate injury that it would entail on Ireland in all respects , morally an * otherwise , it was impossible to calculate .
It was obvious , throughout the debate , that there was a disposition to shirk discussion of the question of reproductive employment . The compromise being —that it was allowable for one board of guardians to sell any surplus to another , but not in the public market . When the House divided there were—For the motion , 42 ; against it , 64 . Majority against , 22 . Tuesday evening is notable in the Parliamentary history of the week for two additional victories gained over Ministers . Apparently they flourish upon minorities , for the more they are beaten the more closely they stick to the Treasury .
The first defeat was given by Lord Robekt Geosvenok , the champion of that distressed and persecuted class of her Majesty ' s subjects , the attorneys and solicitors . He made his annual motion for leave to bring in a bill to repeal the certificate duty . There was no debate . The Chancellor of the Exchequer resisted the motion oh the intelligible ground that he had reduced taxation on articles of consumption until he was blamed for it , and now he was asked to repeal a tax which he did not by any means think deserving of their earliest consideration . The result was striking . The legal interest mustered strongly . The House at once divided ; and there were—For the motion , 162 ; against it , 132 . Majority against Ministers , 30 .
Mr . Henrt Berkeley then moved for leave to bring in a bill for the protection of the Parliamentary electors of Great Britain and Ireland , by taking the votes by way of Ballot . Mr . Berkeley is one of the most daring of those speakers who seldom trouble the House , but who might do so oftener much to its advantage . The interest of the debate did not of course lie in the arguments advanced upon this hackneyed topic ; yet Mr . Berkeley contrived to say some very striking things . He boldly taxed the House with condemning purity of election by refusing the Ballot . He told Lord John Russell that without that protection the- proposed Parliamentary reform would be a nullity ; then , in a rapid sentence , he characterized the system which Lord John Russell had said worked so well : —
" But he asked him , could that system be said to work well the terrors of which deterred a full third of the electors of this country from recording their votea while it permitted the corruption and intimidation of the majority of those who , did vote ; which allowed forty-eight peers of the realm and seventeen wealthy members of Parliament to return to that House ninety-eight members by direct unconstitutional interference , in spite , too , of the sessional orders made annually against the interference of
peers ; which converted our agricultural voters into a luere electoral flock of ehcep ; which , once in seven years or oftener , converted this country into one vast arena of drunken confusion and corruption of all kinds ; which waa one great lie throughout ; which granted to a man in theory that which it denied him in practice ; and which complimented a man upon his liberty while it rendered him a slave ? { Hear , hear . ) Yet that was the ystem which the noble lord thought worked well . "
Mr . Bkhkklky then ran the round of the disgraceful clectionH and noted bribery boroughs ; he pointed out that where bribery was not resorted to , intimidation was ; he especially referred to the condition of the tenant farmers hiding in haystacks and Btrawtacks to escape from their landlords upon polling dl » y »; und quoted Defoe ; in fact , made just that kind ° ' speech which ho makes ho well every year , varying the illuHtrutionn with the times . The House seemed decidedl y inclined to shirk the debate . Mr . Hum it , who had given notice that ho would move his well-* ' » own parliamentary reform resolution as an amendment , made a parliamentary reform speech , and then declined , to press his amendment , because it might « reuto division in the ranka of tho Liberals . The
only other speaker was Captain Scobell , the new member for Bath , who confined himself to detailing in an effective way the evils suffered by the people of Bath for the want of . the Ballot . The House divided ,
when there were—For the motion , 87 ; against it ^ 50 . Majority against Ministers , 37 . At the sitting of the House on Wednesday , a singular scene took place , and a species of Ministerial pose plastique was executed . Mr . Hutt has a bill before the House called the Colonial Property Qualification Bill . " When the order of the day was read to go into Committee upon it , up got Mr . Tufnell , late junior Lord of the Treasury , and moved " that it be
an instruction to the Committee to provide for the abolition of any qualification for members to serve in Parliament . " And then he innocently observed , that he should be quite content to leave the question in the hands of Lord John Russell to be dealt with in the new Reform Bill ; " but he thought he might be excused if he took this opportunity of bringing the question before- them . He then entered into the whole question , whither there is no need for us to follow him . The interest of the
evening turned upon the extraordinary reply of the Premier . Lord John Russell commented on the " singular shape " in which the proposal came—a proposal which had nothing to do with the bill before them . "But , " said he , "it is quite a different question whether or not . there is any utility in keeping up a qualification for seats in that House as it at present stood . " There was " great weight" in Mr . Tufnell ' sarguments . The distinction between " knights girt with a sword , " and " burgesses resident in boroughs , " was no longer a " reality . "
"But in the reign of Queen Anne the landed interest being very jealous of the advance of trade and commerce , bethought them of a new qualification , a new restriction , utterly at variance with the ancient qualification , because it provided that those representatives of cities and burgesses who were formerly persons resident in those cities and boroughs , and who had no property except their own trade" or what they made by merchandise and such manufactures and wares as they disposed of , should all be landowners and have such a qualification . In his opinion that provision was very unadvisable . ( Hear , hear . ) No doubt it was intended to strengthen the landed interest in that House . ( Hear . )"
And he asked whether , since the alterations made in the qualification by Mr . Warburton ' s bill had taken place , " there was in fact any security in a property qualification as it now existed ? " . " Was it not notorious , as his right honourable friend said , that persons elected to that House who had any credit at all , or connections who would help them to a qualification , had no difficulty in obtaining one , and in sitting in that House by a qualification perfectly good in law , although , in point of fact , they were not persons holding the exact qualification ? "
Another notorious fact was , that Scotch members required no qualification , and they \ v-ere quite as good as any other members . He therefore thought that the question of qualification ought " to be tnken into consideration " by Parliament , but not in the way now proposed : — " Either it should be by a special bill for that purpose introduced , with the view to abolish property qualification altogether , or by a bill for general purposes relating to our representation , in which it might form a clause . In either way in which it might be introduced , he certainly was willing to give that question a favourable consideration . ' ( Hear , hear . ) Then it was to be considered
whether there would be any danger at all , supposing all qualification was done away—whether members returned to that House would not be , in fact , perfectly aa well qualified as the present members to sit thecc . It appeared to him that would form in fact a very real qualification ; whether a desirable qualification or not might be matter of dispute , and he dared to say that an honourable gentleman whom he saw opposite might dispute it ; but he thought what did form a real qualification was , that no person without some considerable , means , who was not resident in London , was able to maintain a seat in that House , and to go to the expense- of coming to live in London and leaving any business in which he might be engaged . "
And then he instanced the case of a tenant-farmer , or a small tradesman , neither of whom , he thought , would bo able conveniently to quit his farm or hit ) business to reside in London ; and that in fact would form " a very real qualification . " " If , " said . Lord John , in his closing remarks , " they had the People ' s Charter , and members wero paid , they would not have that security ; but ho never meant to give his vote in favour of the payment of members . ( Hear , hear . ) They did much better without it ; but , with regard to the subject of qualification , ^ houg it he could not vote for the present motion , yet he could uNHuro Ina right honourable friend that when the subject was brought forward as a whole and separate question he should givfc his nupport to it . ( Hear , hear . )
I he opposition were surprised . Mr . Nrwdkoath said there appeared to be a " perfect scramble " uh to who should bo tho author of the futuro Keform Hill . Mr . IIuni , ioy " protested " uguinut the doctrines of Mr . Tufnell , and defied him to prove that the people had evor possessed the right of unUmued choice * . Mr , Ymunon Smith
" Thought the present qualification was an idle ground of objection to persons , and , though considered to be a serious impediment , was , in fact , none . The noble lord said the occasion on which the motion was brought forward was singular ; but the noble lord forgot that his right honourable friend had only just recovered his independent power of speeeh . ( A laugh . ) His right honourable friend had always been an eager reformer , arid therefore took the earliest opportunity of showing it . ( A laugh . )"
And the result ? Just what might be expected from the bland suavity and gentleness of Lord John Russell's speech , and Mr . Tufnell ' s yielding good nature , and Mr . Hutt ' s confidence in the Premierboth bill and motion were withdrawn . The whole thing seemed " got up " for the purpose of giving Lord John Russell an opportunity of saying something liberal . The House then passed to the second reading of the Home-made Spirits in Bond Bill . The history of this bill is well known . Twice Ministers have been beaten upon it ; but on Wednesday , with a strong *• whip , " they avenged their defeats . After some discussioh ] the House divided , when there were —• For the second reading , 166 ; against it , 194 . Majority against , 28 .
The Valuation ( Ireland ) Bill , after considerable opposition , passed through Committee pro forma " . The principle of this bill i 3 to value lands and tenements in Ireland on a scale founded upon the prices of agricultural produce in that country , and to take the value for the next fourteen years , according to those prices as fixed in a scale by the act . The House had a short morning sitting on Thursday , at which the Merchant Seamen ' s Fund Bill was passed , and they met again at five o ' clock .
Mr . Baillib Cochrane asked whether any official information had been received with respect to the French army of occupation in Rome , who were fortifying their positions , and showing every indication of an intention to occupy Rome permanently . Was Lord John Russell prepared to consent to the permanent occupation of Rome by the French ? Lord John " Russell had received accounts from Rome differing materially from those received by Mr . Cochrane . As to the question of the permanent occupation of Rome by French troops , all he could say was , that the recent communications of Ministers with the Government of France led to quite an Qpposite conclusion . The occupation would be temporary , not permanent .
Mr . Hume brought on his motion for an address to inquire into the proceedings of Sir James Brooke , especially into the celebrated attack upon the Dyaks on the 31 st of July , 1849 . Mr , Hume supported his . motion by a long speech plentifully studded with ex- * tracts from private and other correspondence . Th , o charge brought against Sir Tames Brooke is , that ho advised and directed the attack upon the D , yaks , of the 31 st of July , which was a barbarous and cruel massacre , in order to destroy his personal enemies aj ? j Rajah of Sarawak . The whole question turned upon this point—were the slaughtered Dya . , pirates or not ? Mr . Hume held that they were not , and
fortified that opinion by extracts from statements made by merchants and others conversant with the habits and customs of the tribes who swarm in tho Eastern Archipelago . On the other hand Mr . IIeadlam , who led the defence of Sir James Brooke , and those who followed him , asserted most positively that the Dyaks attacked were " piratical Dyaks ; " and asserted , that the object of the attack was to frustrate and , prevent the execution of their piratical schemes . Mr . . U kquhaut varied the debate slightly ; he did not , state that the Dyaks were not pirates , but he stated , that there was no evidence to prove they were ; and
then he took up the ground that if they were pirate s still the attack upon them was a violation of the law of nations . Therefore , he demanded inquiry . Mr . IIenky Dit \ JMMONi > took anew line , he attacked the character of Mr . ( Hume's authorities in his quaint , picturesque , and not over scrupulous fashion , but it served to muke the House laugh . Mr . Baillib . Cochkane paid he knew Mr . Hume ' s good sense wa » opposed to the speeeh he had made as the advocate of a certuin party , whereat Mr . Hume cried out r Pooh , nonsense ! and the House laughed . Mr . Gladstone was unable to vote for tho motion , but
he did justice to the fairness with which Mr . Hume had brought it forward . Lord Pat , mhkston and Mr . Coiidun had a single-handed contest . Lord Pat .-mbrs'ion reduced the question to the point , were the attacked Dyaks pirates or not ? And he argued thus : —Piracy it is well known prevails in the seas round Borneo . Is it likely that these two tribes of Dyaks , the . Surebas und Sukarrans , alono are guiltless of the crime ? Then ho asked : — " What is the necessity of an inquiry !'' ( Hear , hear . " )
What good can result from it ? ( Hear , hear . ) Thorn t * nothing to inquire into , except we have an inquiry such an I don't wish to pursue , as to what could be the rt'a-Bonn for this serious , and persevering , und malignant—( cheers ) —I don ' t apply that word t » anything »* v House ; but this malignant and persevering persecution of an honourable man . ( Renewed cheers ) ^> ir , 1 ant convinced thin House will , by uu overwhelming majority , negative the motion of my honourable friend , and that by bo doing they will proclaim to tho world that Sir Jame *
* July 12, 1&51.] Sep* Suflftlt* 647 ^
* July 12 , 1 & 51 . ] SEP * SUflftlt * 647
-
-
Citation
-
Leader (1850-1860), July 12, 1851, page 3, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse2.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/cld_12071851/page/3/
-