ESTABLISHED 1866. The Marlborough Express PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING. FRIDAY, JANUARY 31, 1913. THE FRANCHISE BILL AND ITS FUTURE.

Marlborough Express, Volume XLVII, Issue 26, 31 January 1913, Page 4

ESTABLISHED 1866. The Marlborough Express PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING. FRIDAY, JANUARY 31, 1913. THE FRANCHISE BILL AND ITS FUTURE.

The Speaker's ruling has necessitated, indeed has compelled, the abandonment of the Franchise Bill, a fact which, however it may enrage the Suffragettes, will rejoice the hearts of the great majority of the Tories, to whom the abolition of plural voting is a thing accursed. That the Cabinet should be split on the women's franchise question is not astonishing, as the question is one upon which personal opinions must always vary, and in their differences on this point the Conservatives are no more in unison than their opponents. It may yet be found possible for a private Bill to be introduced and Members left free to vote as they please,' unhampered by party ties; but those who, like ourselves, desire to see the cause of democracy make rapid progress in the. Mother Country must regret that the trouble over Sir Edward Grey's amendment will postpone the passing of a general Franchise Reform Bill until next

session.. At the same time it may yet be that good may come out of apparent evil, and that the postponement ,or withdrawal of the original

measure may result in a much more comprehensive Bill being brought forward. Already it is stated' that the Government will next session intro-

duce such a; measure, which will include the much-desired redistribution. The inequalities and discrepancies generally of the existing system of distribution of seats have long demanded a system of readjustment. The original Bill, as our readers may remember, laid down, the "one man one vote" principle, and struck a deadly blow at the antiquated and utterly unjust system of plural voting, a system under which, so it has been estimated, the Tories gained some thirty to forty seats to which, under a system in which wealth would have no special advantage, they would not be en- . titled:.' VWhen first the provisions of the Bill , were cabled, we expressed regret that Mr Asquith had not tackled the question of .redistribution as courageously as he had done that of plural voting. • Perhaps^'however, the British Prime Minister^ knew- what his colleague Sir Edward Grey intended to do on the women's; franchise question, and, I recognising that he would encounter 5 internal Cabinet troubles on this I question, to be followed by dissent sions and delay in the House itself, r came_ to the conclusion that it would ; be wiser to content himself with the abolition of plural voting for this session, /leaving redistribution to be , dealt with later on. The "clearing of the decks," as it were, by an agreement to let the women's franchise question: be settled by the introduction of. a private Bill, should greatly assist the Government next session in. passing a really comprehensive, exI haustive measure of electoral reform. It is of the highest importance that a natural corollary of payment of Members should be introduced in the shape of abolition of the plural vote, and of a sweeping reform of the present system of distribution, for later on, when the inevitable appeal to the country comes on the Home Rule Bill the Liberals would be badly 1 handicapped were the elections fought ' on the old system under which wealth possessed such an unfair advantage. It such a Bill as was outlined in our cable messages this wek can be passed next session, a splendid stroke m the advancement of truly democratic principles will be achieved. Mr Asquith has proved himself persistent and tenacious in his handling of the thorny Home Rule problem, and we look forward with confidence to his displaying the same determination and patience with the almost equally important question of electoral reiorm. ;.' ■ ■ As to the women's franchise question, _the wilder spirits amongst the Suffragettes—the Pankhursts, Despards, and their like—are impudently preaching a campaign of violence. Such conduct as that which they so brazenly advocate can only hare the effect of stimulating and strengthening opposition to their cause, not only in the House of Commons, but throughout the country It £ lM^S&kft t0 sco we"-«<Jucated, well-bred English women behaving in such an idiotic way. As we have always said, there can be no really logical or equitable opposition to the JS Principle of equal electoral rights for woman and man; but in view of the continued and determined defiance of all law and order in which the Suffragette extremists indulge there need be small wonder should a majority of Members of the House of Ujmmons come to the conclusion that even should the women's franchise be granted those who are now and who have for some time past been behaving more like escapees from Bedlam than persons of ordinary sanity should be debarred, at least for some years to come, from the rights of which they have proved themselves to be so undeserving.