THE REFORM BILL.

New Zealand Herald, Volume IV, Issue 1126, 24 June 1867, Page 7

THE REFORM BILL.

On the question that the preamble be postponed [April 11]. On clause 3, Mr. Gladstone moved his first mnendmcnt, striking out the condition of personal rating, 'iho object of this ..series of amendments, he said, was to carry out tho views which ho had expressed on the first and second readings, and, after complaining of the high-handed tone in which the Chancellor of tho Exchequer had dealt with them—unexpected after his manjaspirations for conciliation and co-operation, and after the concessions which had been made on the Liberal side—lie described the plan of the Government as open to two strong objections, the extreme narrowness of its immediate enfranchisement, and the stringent barriers it erected against the entrance of the great mass of householders under £10. In illustration of the first he referred to the returns, maintaining that only just over 100,000 would be admitted, and that two-thirds of the householders under £10, being compounders, would be excluded. Tho real gist of the question, however, was the manner in which compound householders were to be admitted, and on this head he denied that personal rating was a constitutional basis of the franchise, and insisted that a man who pays rates by his laudlord is as truly rated as if he paid them with his own hand. He showed | at length how unequally the franchise, coupled with the operation of the Small Tenements Act, would work in different, towns, and even in different parishes of the same town, and how in towns partially under the Small Tenements Act it would hand over all the electoral power io a minority of the inhabitants, and among other objections lie repeated that the bill would put the composition of constituencies in the hands of the local authorities. Working men had often strong reasons, arising out of the nature of their work and the weekly payment to their wages, for choosing to be compound householders and even lodgers (and if a lodger franchise was to be conceded what became of peri sonal payment ?) and after going over again the " fine" argument, which he maintained "was not removed by Mr. Disraeli's new clauses, he concluded by a vigorous condemnation of the bill as a two faced measure—one looking towards Toryism and the other towards Radicalism which, by the punishments, restrictions, and limitations with which it was accompanied, must be regarded by the people as a piece of class legislation, and must give rise to universal dissatisfaction and agitation. A fter various speakers, Mr. Roebuck moved the adjournment of the debate, and after some caustic remarks from Mr. Erie apropos of the threatened dissolution, the Chairman was ordered to report progress. The adjourned debate wasresumed [Aprd 12] by Mr. Roebuck, who, after protesting against the epithets which were lavished on Reformers who did not agree with Mr. Gladstone, compared the rival plans of Mr. Disraeli and Mr. Gladstone, and expressed his preference for the first, because it drew no invidious line between the two classes, and extended to all classes of householders the same privileges as to the ten pounders. Rut Mr. Gladstone's plan was restrictive, and its true character was shown by the enthusiastic support it had received Jrom Lord Cranborne and his friends. Discussing tlje arguments against the bill, he asked why the compound householder, on being put on the register, should pay a smaller rate than the man directly rated, and insisted that personal payment did not mean payment- jiropria munu, but simply that he was held liable, and in conclusion he made some sarcastic reflections on the motives of the opposition, remarking that as he had never been in office, lie could not share in the bitter feelings caused by a temporary exclusion, and having no object in view but the good of the country, he was not ready to jump from one side of the House onanypretence,howeverslight. Mr. W. E. Foiisteh, speaking as an old reformeranda friend of householdsufi'rage.maintained that the bill only gave a ratepaying suffrage, and though it might be good for the 57 open boroughs, for the other 171, where the compounding acts were in force, partially or entirely, it was a restrictive measure, or, as it had been called, only an " optional" household suffrage bill. He strongly objected to the safeguai'ds, fines, and limitations with which the bill was accomplished ; they would create neverending contests for electioneering influence, and they would not last. Though he could not support Mr. Gladstone's £5 line, he should support this particular amendment, and he justified his opposition as a reformer io this scheme on the ground that it could never be accepted as a settlement, and while admitting that the restrictions would be swept away iu five years he feared the agitation by which this end must be attained.

Air. Bbight defined tlie amendment as a proposal tliat every person to wliom tlie franchise was to be given should l>e put on exactly the same footing as every other voter, and pointed out that Mr. Hardy had not explained wliy the compounders under £10 should be treated differently from those above the line, and that difference, he asserted, was iu dircct violation of the law as it now stood. For tlie purpose of the franchise, the landlord's payment, ho insisted, was the same as the tenant's, quoting in support j of this a judgment of the Common Pleas, and he asked why, for the mere purpose of large disfranchisement, should this lan- be altered? Illustrating tlie operation of the bill, he showed that while in Sheffield it would admit 2400, in Birmingham it would admit 01113 23'10, excluding 30,000 compounders, and why, he asked, should the extension of the franchise iu such towns be accompanied unnecessarily and capriciously by the uprooting of a valuable economic arrangement:-' Supposing personal pavment to be abandoned, the franchise must either be household suffrage, pure , and simple, or must be fixed on a line above which the franchise should be given to every one. Though he had always been in ' favour of household suffrage, he was ready to accept .Mr. Gladstone's simple, lioncst plan, which would amount to about a £6 rental, and would admit the best paid and most intelligent of the working classes. Turning to the gentlemen around him who supported the bill with an eye to household suffrage, thinking that the badness of the bill would establish such a "raw" 011 public opinion that the restrictions in the bill must be soon swept away, he reminded them that three-fourths even of the Liberal side were opposed to household sufTerage, and that in all probability when that demand was made the House would draw this line which was now proposed, ife did not think it for the advantage of the most dependent of the population that tbey should be submitted to the excitement of elections. In his own bill he proposed a £'3 or £4 rental. 11 e would not quarrel about a pound, but he believed the franchise might he settled on that basis. He wished they could settle this matter without partv-feeling and without a division, and that it should be settled by the wisdom of statesmanship, and that it should be grappled with by that generosity which belonged to every great statesman of this country. The Chancellor of the Exchequer commenced by reminding the House that there were now two policies before the House, for Mr. Gladstone's amendments amounted to a counter

3 proposition, and must be taken as a bundle ; and 3 to bis own Mr. Gladstone bad taken two objeet tions—that tbe principle of rating was new--1 funglcd, nnd that it was too exclusive. To tbo 1 first lie replied that tbe principle of rating was 2 consecrated by our ancient law and by tbo Reform Act, and to the second be replied that ? in fixing a basis tho question was not whether r its eflect would be expansive or exclusive, but whether it was just. The »reas objection to Mr. Gladstone's plan was that it would not settle the question, which lie believed this bill would, and to all (lie difficulties raised about the compound householders, lie replied that if the bill passed 11103' would bo easily overcome in practice, pointing out at the same time that all ' these difficulties and inconveniences would ' abound under the system of a hard line. His I object was to enfranchise tho worthy—the men who really valued the franchise and | would take trouble to obtain it, aud they would bo the first to guard their privileges . against the unworthy, which was the answer to those who complained that those securities would not last. Alter a sharp and lively reply | to the attaelcs of Lord Cranborne and Mr. ; Beresford Hope, he turned to Mr. Gladstone, 1 reminding him that be had bad his innings already, and complained of his eagerness to make a party attack, which he insisted this amendment was. Drawing a distinction between Mr. Gladstone's amendment and those which had been proposed by other members, and which did not wear a party complexion, he assured the House that, notbwithstanding his "'circular," which was a legitimate weapen to parry a party attack, UlO Government wore most willing and desirous, carrying out the pledge he had given the House before, to co-operate with the House to settle the question, to consider candidly every amendment, and, if it was not inconsistent with any vital principle, to adapt it to the bill. He had not proposed a lodger franchise, because to propose one that would be satisfactory was a most difficult thing'to do. If a satisfactory proposition for a lodger franchise could be made lie should be very glad to accept it. And so with regard to the voting papers, he wished to consult the House. "It is a disagreeable thins," Mr. Disraeli continued, to distinguish between the House generally and the right lion, gentleman, to whom I always wish, as the head of a party, to pay every honor, but this is a subject of a peculiar character; it has experienced peculiar fortunes during the course of the year, nnd it is my duty to distinguish between the House generally and the right hon. gentleman, though he is the leader of a party—(oh, oh, and cheers) —bccfuise I understand that between the House and the Government upon this question of Reform there was an understanding that we were by mutual confidence and co-operation to carry if we could a fair measure. That is the understanding which I am perfectly ready to fulfil, and there is no suggestion which has been made which will not receive from us all the consideration it deserves, with an anxious desire to adopt or modify it. But when the right lion, gentleman opposite comes forward suddenly with a counter proposition to the main proposition of the Government, it is impossible for me to close my eyes to the nature of that movement. J cannot in any way agree to the proposition he has made. They would entirely alter and completely supersede the policy which wc would recommend the House to adopt, and therefore I trust the hon. gentleman will clearly understand that in tho distinction I have made I have not done it in the heat of debate, for there is no heat at this moment —(a laugh)—but I wish, on the eve of an important division, that there should be a clear and honest understanding between the Government and the House of Commons on the subject matter of the He form Bill. We have acted entirely in accordance with our rcpresentions to the House. Wc believe we have experienced from the House a true candour aud generous consideration, and we are anxious at this moment cordially to co-operate with the House to settle the question." (Cheers.) Mr. Gladstone said he held liis position as leader of the Opposition by the free choice of the members of the Opposition, and if the Chancellor of the Exchequer would accept no proposition from him, he could not understand how he could consult the House. He thought that the late Government, who left office in June last, when the majority of the 1 louse wished them to remain in it, were not amenable to the charge now made against them, that they wished to turn out the Government. In summing up the course of the debate lie repeated his old objections to the injustice with which the compounders were treated, the improper power given to vestries, the facilities for corruption, etc., and defended the policy of drawing a line as that which would admit the best class of voters and would eflect the most lasting settlement. The principle which he asked the House to adopt was one of permanent application, and was one which could never be wrong. It was, that those whom Parliament admitted to the franchise should be admirted on equal terms. No bill laying down the principle of personal rating could be satisfactory ; and limit or 110 limit to tho suffrage, his objection was the same. The Chairman was about to put the question, when Sir JL. Edwards interposed with a question as to when Mr. Osborne had sent word to Colonel Taylor of his intention to bring the matter forward which he did in the earlier part of the evening. Mr. Brand said he undertook to inform him, but could not find him, and Mr. Osborne said be thought Mr. Brand had informed him. The division was taken at half-past 1 o'clock, exactly, in a scene of extraordinary excitement. It occupied (says the Times) about a quarter of an hour, and as tbo benches gradually tilled with hon. gentlemen returning from the lobbies, the most intense anxiety was displayed respecting the result. The tellers for the aye were the first to arrive, and, amid breathless suspense, they handed in their return to the clerk at the table. The nature of that return was immediately communicated from one member to another with almost electric rapidity, and it was whispered that the Government had commanded a majority, kvery face on the Ministerial sido beamed with excitement and delight as the tidings spread. So overpowering, indeed, was tho enthusiasm enkindled that hon. members evidently experienced great difficulty in restraining their emotion, and a slight clapping of bands was audible. The tellers for tho noes made their appearance in about a minute after those on the other side, and, amid a hush of expectation, handed in their return. The figures were quickly entered, aud the clerk handed the paper to the Government teller, Mr. Whitmore. A yocif'crous clicer at oncc broke out from the Ministerial ranks, the swell of acclamation rising to a full diapason of jubilation, and then falling with music-like cadence. Meanwhile the four tellers had retired a few paces,- had again advanced to the table, and as soon as a sufficient lull was restored, Mr. Whitmore announced the numbers. They were :— Por the amendment 289 .Against it 310 Majority for the Government 21' • -Another, and even more fervid outburst of enthusiasm succeeded, tho Ministerialists cheering with almost frantic energy, and many of them waving their hats, and giving other unusual manifestations of delight, a number of hon. members pressed forward to the 'I reasury Bench, and shaking hands with the Chancellor of the Exchequer, -who waa radiant with smiles, congratulated him with great warmth on the victory -which the Government had achieved. The Opposition had all this while preserved an unkroken silence, and only showed by their countenances the disappointment which they experienced. In a few minutes there was a rush to the doors, and the chairman having been ordered to report progress, the House resumed.