On this page
-
Text (1)
-
' ^ : /¦: No. ^70. M^cn 26^^^ ¦ : ' ^¦^-...
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.
¦ —¦ .. W. • . ... Imperial Parliament. ...
ii ti- ~ MT *~ Trnnr *^ —rr ** ir * '' aaj ^ w ** * ' , ¦¦ ' ¦ ¦ MIL ' tinder the existing law aH pauper children were registered and educated as Protestants . This ¦ ¦ JSSaflS ? , " districts ^ re the ^ ajarity , Graven the whole , of the population Were Roman Catholics , ^ considered- unjust . f The quest Mi Ij ^ xcx f d much irritation , which the present bill , v hoseJ ^ Mti were brieflv explained by the lion , member ,, was designed to remove . After two or . tliree speeches from Independent members , a cry wasparsed or Mn Whiteside and then for Lord Naas , to state the view ^ ss ns & ^ M-f-. ESSs ^^^^^ f ltBi ^ on the spot upon the merits of a bill with * nose details -h « was onl y just made acquainted . —Mr . WinxESioE having briefly spoken , the debate was adjourned . . . , , The House then rose at six o docjC . Thursday , March 24 . " In the House of Lords , on his accession to the title , LorJTnuRLOAy took his seat , and signed the Parliamentary roll . INDIA LOASS . Lord ELLEKnoKOUGHi in moving for certain papers relating to India , gave notice that he should call the attention of the House to the state of the Indian money-market . TRADING COMPANIES' WIXDIXGVnP BirjL . On the order of the day for going into Committee on the recommitment of this bill , Lord Donoughmore , in answer to Lord Grrey said that since the passing of the Limited Liability . Act , in 1855 , 1 , 988 companies , with a collective capital of £ 75 , 442 , 887 , had been registered under that Act . Out of these , between sixty and seventy had ceased their Operations , and the remaining 1 , 030 had at present a capital of upwards of £ 55 , 000 , 000 . It was his opinion that the Act had exhibited little practical result . —Lord Qverstoxe wished to know how much of the capital of these companies had been paid up . Previously to the passing of the Limited Liability Act , in 1855 , he had pointed out the fraudulent practices which the Act would develop , and the result had justified his prediction , for but ot 1 , 098 companies , between sixty and seventy had been already wound up . The Act was founded on dishonest principles , and he should oppose it on every occasion . —Lord Stanley of Alderley was in favour of the bill . —Lord Grey hoped the statement of Lord Overstone would prevent individuals from putting any confidence in joint-stock companies of limited liability . —The Marquis of Claxricarde considered the bill an excellent one . The bill then passed through committee . . Several bills were then read a second time , and reports on others received . The Manor Courts ( Ireland ) bill was rend a third time , aud passed . The House adjourned at seven o'clock . THE GOVERNMENT REFORM BILL . Jn the House of Commons , among the questions addressed to the Government was one by Mr . Mitchell , whether they persisted in maintaining the uniformity of town and county franchise as the principle of their Reform Bill ; to which the Chancellor of the Exchequer gave an important , though guarded reply . He said ;— " Sir , it is impossible for mo to give a . categorical answer tp a question of this kind addressed to me at this moment . It would demand a statement , both of argument and of detail , which could not be compressed within the legitimate scope of ft reply to a question put to a Minister on this occasion ( Cheers ) . But , bir , this I will say to the hon gentleman , that when I introduced the bill for tho amendment of the representation of the people it was the opinioa of my colleagues that there was no provision in that measure ¦ which might not in Committee be beneficially submitted to that qahn and impartial consideration ( cheers and laughter ) which the houso had pledged itself to Her Majesty to give tp this question ( renewed cheers ) , and without which pledge on the part of this assombly , considering the circumstances under which we acceded to power , that bill ¦ would certainly nob have been introduced" ( Cheers . ) THE ADJOURNED DEBATE . The debate on the Representation of the Poople Dill-was resumed by Mr . Milker CHwson , who said the speeches from the Treasury Bench were deficient in one material particular ; they had not stated , supposing tlio Houso should adopt tie Bill , what advantage would bo conferred upon'tho country , and what , improvements would bo introduced into the constituency of England and Waloa . Ho should approach tho consideration of this measure , brought forward by tlie Conservative party , without any prejudice $ but ho was not prepared tb pass any measure which he conceived to , be injurious or imperfect . What , thav , did tho Government propose to effect ? Ho did not call this a Reform BUI , but a measure to operate in a peculiar and novel manner upon tho eounby and borough constituencies $ and
he asked the Government what good the country would derive from a l ' Qi county occupation franchise , coupled with the condition that freeholders in boroughs should be deprived of their county franchise ? On this question of franchise he thought the principles laid down in the resolution of Lord John Russell were , on the whole , sound and adequate as a basis for representative -reform . Tne right hon . member then examined the details of the bill , objecting to many of its provisions , especially the opportunity afforded for the manufacture of fictitious votes . The question , he insisted ought to be discussed without regard to class interests , and while protesting against any measure which left the working classes out of view , he deprecated the attempt to enlist the sympathies of another section of the community iii ' behalf of the bill as being essentially a " middle class" measure , ^ This was not reform ; it would produce universal dissatisfaction ; and was it not better , instead of killing such a bill by a slow process , as proposed by Mr . Horsman , to slaughter it at once by adopting , the amendment ? This was the fairest course towards the Government as well as to the House . — Mr . Adderl ey -maintained that the opposition to the bill was untenable , so long as the opponents refused to tell what better measura they were prepared themselves to propose . He observed , that the issue now plainly before the House was between two broadI principles , — ' first , the extension of tne electoral franchise on the basis of qualification , -with a test of fitness , namely , property ; second , its extension without limit , as a mutter of equal right-to all citizens , that is , on the basis of numbers . Which of these principles , he asked , did Lord J . Russell adopt ? He nuctuate-1 between both ; he -was said to be "in the same boat " with the advocates of the latter principle , whereas in his speech he had declared for a- property qualification . The bill was based upon the first principle , but it provided by the savings-banks suffrage for . the indefinite extension of the franchise to the working classes * Mr . Adtlerley then discussed the , amendment , replying to tlie objection of Lord J . Russell * that the bill intefered with-tlie freehold franchise in boroughs , and was a violation of prescriptive rights . He contended that the bill merely adjusted the balance between urban and county influence , disturbed since the bill of 183 . 2 . la conclusion , he warned the House that this was , perhaps , the last , tlie golden opportunity it had of standing upon the principle of propertv , observing tliftt . it was a grave matter for the consideration of the great Whig party , whether , agreeing as they did with the present Government , upon that ' principle , they would hand over this question to a party that demanded the electoral franchise without , limitation , and founded only upon numbers . —Mr . IIeadlam contended that the Government , in bringing forward a measure of Reform , had no right to fetter the bill with conditions which rendered it impossible for the House to accept it , and that the amendment , the adoption of which would be fatal to the bill , was reasonable and proper . He condemned the now device of uniformity of franchise and dwelt upon the mischievous facilities offered by the admission of non-resident voters . — Mr . Buktimok consented to vote for the second read-¦ in . " of the bill , although he disliked some of its details , and thought that it did not do justice to the counties . He regarded this contest , he . said , as a mero political and party struggle , and , after reading a lecture to Lord J . Kubsell upon his dealings with this question , called upon him to declare distinctly what were his views and intentions respecting Reform , adding that it had been asserted that there wag to be a coalition , and that he and Mr . Bright were associated—a statement which drew from Lord J . Russell an emphatic " No . "—Mr . W . Djgnison in a few sentences , supported tho amendment—Mr . L . Kino acknowledged the concession granted by the Government in adopting tho 101 . county franchise , for which he had himself so often contended . But in adopting his principle ho found that the framers of the bill had so spoiled and mutilated his measure for reducing the county franchise that ho could not give it his support . His bul disfranchised nobody ; this bill deprived a whole class of the franchise . This bill professed to be a Reform bill , but he should have expected that any Government which thought it right to propose a Reform Bill in 1869 would havo adopted the same principle as that of 1832 , and that certain small boroughs would bo included in a schedule A \ whereas they were carefully prosorvod in this bill , There wore four points which should bo found in a Reform Bill , but in which this bill vaa deaciont—tlicf disfrunchisemqnt of small and Inslgnillyant boroughs , tlie enfranchisement of largo towns , the extension of the county franchise , and tho extension , of that for . tho boroughs ep ns to admit tho working elasses .- ^ -Mr . Duxxpn should vote for tho second reading of tho Bill . — -Mr . W . J . Fox obsorvol tlint they had heard strong laudation of tho middle olnseos , which came very oddly from those who had opposed measures for tho bonoflt
of those classes . The middle classes were now anxious that the working classes , should be admitted to the franchise , and he had always reganled a'Reform ' Billas a measure for their enfranchisement , to which all had beeti looking year after year . In his opinion , they might be safely trusted , not as governors of the country , but to . support the men who were to govern it . Hetreated the apprehension that if those classes were enfranchised all power would pass into their hands as a mere chimera , . The machine of government could never work harmoniously until all classes were admitted to an equal share of political privileges . —Mr . B . Hoi'E combated the : objection . -to-the bill founded upon the so-called disfranchisement of borough freeholders and the nominal assimilation of the town and county . franchises . Thegreat object was ¦ to continue a full and f : iir '' representation both for counties and boroughs . If this were accomplished , minor considerations might be disregarded . With respect to the claims of the working classes , lie said , o-ranting their morality and their intelligence , the franchise that would give them the preponderating influence of number . * , with their incomplete knowledge of political science , would make th ' jnr tools in lh- ° haii'ls of others to advance the doctrines-oi socialism . He denied that they- possessed an indefeasible right to the franchise . If that principle were admitted , it would be impossible to stop short of universal suffrage . He was -nevertheless readyto « ive-the working man a larger share of electoral , nrh-ilce . ' but always as a reward to bs won by perseverance and industry . He should support the se-on-l reading of the bill , ho said , as is . did not proceed upon hiwh . theoretical principles , but went w ¦ work in a practical manner . — Mr . Bkrkal Osbobxe said he thought the Government had fully redeemed the plodge they gave last year , but that it would have , been better if they had proceeded in a larger and more , liberal -way-to-settle this question ; for , unless it was settled upoii a pormanent basis , it would be better not to bring m a Reform Bill at all . Why was a Reform kill eal ed for ? The act of 1832 was defective m totally omitting tlie great body of the working classes from the franchise , and if a Keform Bill was wan . te . Tat all ; it was to redress this grievance . Did the bill propose to do it ? Sir B . Lytton had expressly told the House ' thair he declined to admit the working ' nvMi to power ; and they were never recognised «* the bill except when they were . to be disfranchised , as the dockyard labourers . Neither the lodging-, ' house franchise nor - the savings-bank franchise . , would admit working men ; the Government did not want them to get it . " With regard to these various 'fancy franchises , '" said the hon . member , ¦ " I must say that I quite agree with tho , hon . member for Birmingham—though to say so , I suppose , will be according to some hon . gentlemen on the other side , to admit that I am a revolutionist . (' Hear , ' and a laugh . ) I agree with that lion , " entlemau that these fancy franchises are not the things for the poople of England . They are the mere political millinery of Downing-steet . ( Loud opposition cheers and laug hter . ) What we want \ s a broad and simple test . Have variety of sufn-age , if you like , but let the test be broad and simple . ( Cheers ) Many questions have been asked me as to what I am for . I confess that I am for a property test . ( Hoar , hear . ) I admit that that is an imperfect test , but still it is a test which is simple and Oan be understood ; because , as has been well said , by one of those writers of ' deplorable rubbish to whom the right hon . gentleman ( Sir E . B . Lyttpn ) has alluded , the inheritance of property implies education , arid the acquisition of property implies intelligence . Therefore , I say , what is ¦ tho use of these fancy franchises ? " ( Cheers . ) Tho bj I would disfranchise the noble body of borough freeholders . In reviewing the reasons urged against tho amend * ment , Mr . Osborno passed some severe strictures upon tho speeches of Mr . Horsman , whom ho Btylea ¦« a dyspeptic politician , " and the Solicitor-General , and , in conclusion , denounced the bill as an act of spoliation and injustice , a change without progress . —Mr . Walpolb rose next amidst a hurii of prof quad attention . In the course of his speech ho laid groat . stress upon tho nocessity for facilitating voting , repeated l . is opposition to tho ballot , and approved of the voting paper portion of the bi , except thai one of the witnesses should be a public office . Jte dofenaed also tho extreme moderation oi «« a " ¦ fraSchisement proposed , and cha longed U ; : advocates of redistribution ti > say what < fj" /^ " oi wSJSo Retorted , % Mx equal oflbot . . that though an utterly rotton boroiiffh when it escaped dlsiTand . Sonti by tho Whiga , it is now as lnuoTcndoiit as tlio ¦ borough of Dover . ) . Ho condemned the disft-anohlfloiriont of small boroughs , eS In cases ° ? l > l < ° a corruption or nomination . If , he observed , the Houso wisliod to
' ^ : /¦: No. ^70. M^Cn 26^^^ ¦ : ' ^¦^-...
' ^ : /¦ : No . ^ 70 . M ^ cn 26 ^^^ ¦ : ' ^¦^ -- ^ L , \ '
-
-
Citation
-
Leader (1850-1860), March 26, 1859, page 7, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse2.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/cld_26031859/page/7/
-