On this page

• Text (1)

  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.

  • 

    4a& THE LEADER. C^To-47ly April 2, 185Q.

• 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.

    Imperial Parliament. Monday, March 21. C...

    but to the fundamental principles of the bilL The bill wis altogether experimental , and would prolong instead of terminating the agitation on the question . —¦ Mr . Robert Palmer disliked the bill in many particulars , and preferred the scheme of reform suggested by Mr . " Walpole . Regarding the resolution , however , as a mere party move , he intended to vote against it . —Mr . Westjelead opposed the -bill , -which lie believed would injuriously disturb the existing balance of parties .-r-Maj or Edwards accepted the bill as conferring a great boon on the country , by enfranchising at least 300 , 000 persons who at present ¦ were denied electoral privileges . —Mr ,. Collier was ready to support the resolution irrespective of all

    consequences . The bill was regarded in the country as a sham and delusion . The public were quiet , not because they were apathetic , but because they relied on its rejection by the house .- — -Sir J . Walsh opposed , the resolution . —Mr . O- Stanley explained the reason which had induced him to give notice of a vote of censure , which he had subsequently withdrawn upon the announcement made by Mr . White - side , that if the present amendment was carried it VotiM be regarded as equivalent to a vote of censure ly the Government . —Mr . K . Macattlat contended that the bill effectually threw open the franchise to every class of the community- He also approved of

    the measure upon its broad principle . —Mr . Mellob alluding to the speech just delivered , noticed that one member had at last been found who seemed to approve of the Mil in its entirety . He retorted on the Government members the charges of disunion and faction which they had flung out against that , the opposition , side of the house , and declared his resolve to support the amendment . —Mr . Hardy commented upon the conduct of the opposition in •' burking" a measure in which there were avowedly many provisions for extending , the franchise and improving the system of representation . Reform Mils which lord J . Russell himself brought in

    contained propositions \ of disfranchisement quite as large as that he so much censured in the present measure . The amendment by . which it had been encountered was , he argued , indirect and disingenuous , and he proceeded , to point out the inconsistent nature of the arguments advanced in its support . If the success of the resolution enabledlts concoctors to form a ministry he prophesied that before long they would be assailed : by their own supporters with propositions , for sweeping reforms ,, and obliged to shelter themselves under the protection of their

    Conservative antagonists . —Mr . J . V . Fitzgerald Characterised the bill as a delusion , and entered into the history of the former Reform Act , to show that the proposed disfranchisement of the borough freeholders was inconsistent with the spirit and intention of that enactment . Only a single member had ventured to .. approve the bill , though many professed their intention of voting for the second reading . He was prepared to support the resolution , even at the sacrifice of the bill , though he did not see why that sacrifice should be incurred , even if the amendment was carried . — 'On the motion of Mr . Du Cane , the debate ,- after some remonstrance against a premature close of the discussion , was again adjourned . The House adjourned at a quarter before one o ' clock . Wednesday , March 30 . TRIAL J 5 T JT 0 RY ( SCOTLAND } BILL . In the HciTrsE ojr Commons ^ Mt . Dwloi 1 , in moving the second reading of the bill , explained its object , which was to reduce the time of deliberation of juries in . Scotland , when nine jurors agreed , before a verdict could be received from , the majority , from six hours , according to the existing law , to three hours . JEte observed that the question was totally distinct from that of the bill which had been thrown out in the . House of Lords on the preceding night , verdicts of the majority being receivable in Scotland in both criminal and civil cases .-r-The Lord Advocate cordially assented to the projposed change . T- ~ liro opposition was offered to the bill , but a short debate ensued , in which the English jury law came incidentally under discussion , and several English members expressed their regret that the House had been deprived of an opportunity of considering the question of the unanimity of juries by the decision of tho Lords .- ^ - TJie bill was read a second timoi , Tho Law Ascertainment Bill also passod ; the stage of second reading-, on the motion of Mr , DuwLor . THE nANKRTTrTCV AND INSOLVENCY BILL . Lord J . Russell moved that tho bill bo referred to a Select Committee , expressing a wish that tho Government bill , which had passed tho other House , should bo referred to the eamo Cornmittco . ~ - * The A-TTORNMT-GiairaanAL entirely agreed to the course proposed , and had no objection to referring the othfr bill , which had corao down from tho Lords , and had boon read a first time , to tho same Comjraittee . —i-Aftor some discussion as to whether the Committee should take ovldqnco , tho motion was agreed to . , „ , . Tho Admiralty Court Bill ana tho Charitable Uses BiU were respectively read a second tirao .

    —rMr . Walter commented upon the disaffreeahip character of the alternative placed before the Housp and stated the reasons which induced him to vot e against the second reading of the bill , and to abstain from voting for the resolution . The distinctive principle of the bill was the identity of the suffrage - but there had been a confusion between identity and ' equality of suffrage . After pointihg . provisions in the bill to which lie objected , he observed that the Government were about to devolve upon the House the duty of making a Reform Bill , which he did not think' a proper course of proceeding . There were two distinct modes of effecting the object of

    extending the suffrage—either by lOAvering the qualification for the suffrage or by a process of selection —and the question was whether it AVas not better to raise the people to the suffrage , hy putting it within the reach of the industrious working man The whole question of the suffrage was a serious and difficult one , and he did not see on what ground , if the franchise were reduced below , loj . they could stop short of household suffrage . He should be sorry , he said , if the result of this discussion should be the resignation of the Ministry ; he saw no reason why they should not withdraw tin ' s bill and bring in another . —Mr . Grebkall opposed

    the amendment . —Mr . Gilpist said lie should vote for the resolution . The bill was no Reform Bill at all and if he were asked whether he would have this bill or nothing , he would say he would prefer nothing . He did not wish , however , to see a change of Government , and should not join in any vote of censure upon the general policy of the present administration . —Mr . Henley said he had listened with great attention to the whole of the debate , and if he had heard anything to shake Ms opinion he should not hesitate to say so . Tliis was , in his opinion , a very large measure , —large in itself and in the

    principle it contained . lie proceeded to analyse the bill with great minuteness of criticism , stating his objections to it . In considering the amendment , which was the real question before the House , he observed that the first part of the resolution Avas met by the clauses brought fbrAvard by the Government ; and the last part Avas as vague as possible , so much so that no human being could asrsign any definite meaning to it . Then , vhat did the Government say ? If lie interpreted it rightly , they had said as much as they could be expected to say , and as much as A \ ould relieve the House from any

    difficulty in voting for the second reading of the bill . He was ready to go into committee upon it , and he hoped , Avhen it got there , the opinions of the House Avould have their weight Avith the Government , and that the bill Avould bo put into a shape that Avould satisfy the more moderate people—all would not be satisfied Avith any measure . He concluded with a strong denunciation of all changes that Ayould assimilate our mixed constitution to that of America on the one hand , or that of Trance on the other . — Mr . Roebuck described the changes Avhich the House of Commons had undergone since its first establishuntil it hau

    ment , tracing the steps of its progress Decome practically the ruling poAver of the State . ^ I lie last stage was accomplished in tho Reform Act of j 832 They were about to reform the Reform Act , and the questions were- * -what was it that required reform , and what were the means to attain that end t une g * eat blemish in the Iteform Act of 1832 was the exclusion from power of the working classes , 1 nose classes had since , been increasing in intelligence , showing themselves worthy of participating in and the two groat

    power with the other classos , objects of any Reform Bill were , to extend the suffrage to the working classes , and to regula e the distribution of the electoral bodies . Did the bill ot tho Government attain either end ? . Ho ociieyea that it would bo anything but satisfactory to ^ tno working classes ; but lie believed , in ° PPP J ; J ? Mr . Bright , that good could bo got from theiWU . Was it best to leave the bill in tho hands of the present Ministers , or take tho oh unco of mnjrlnnr it , to Lord Palmorston nnd Lord John llusBOU r

    Tho former ho could not regard as a reiormcr , v » w tlio latter was tottered by party ties , find had urn been accustomed to look xipon powcras an appamigu of Whiff statesmen . On tho whole , lie , P ^ ici m ! tno prosont Government , and-would voto tor tho secoa reading , if thoy undertook not to throw up tlioi mi , should certain extensions , including n AO \\™ »> m franchise , bo carried in oommi . ttuo . On Jtig <» suranco , ho did not soo why tho prosont ninenun ent need be pressed , as the House would I ^ . f ™ 2 y sure in their own hands , and might mould i 1 as m ploascd . —A number of members roso from J ° ^ tlio gangway , but Mr . Dibkahm roso nlflo , "" f V greeted with loud cheers from a houso rap iy » ° coining crowded in ovory corner . Almost his J sentence olicitod a burst of applause fromthe bone nj behind him , which was oontlnuod M ™ ? *^ . Ho s ^ ald that after reiterated pledges feivon by ^ cessive ministers , for tlio introduction ot nk {• " » Bill , no measure ha * over ^^ . ^ . ffiSCai tlio stage of soconfl reading . In this mn uiruu a

    The House went into committee on the Markets ( Ireland ) Bill , and passed several clauses . The House adjourned at six o ' clock . Thursday , March 31 . In the House of Lords , the third reading of the Indictable Offences Bill was , on the motion of Lord Campbeix , postponed , and the Railway Transfer Ticket Bill passed through Committee . The Loed Cuangelloe , in moving the second reading of the Manslaughter Bill , explained that the object of the bill was to enable coroners to admit persons in certain cases charged with manslaughter to bail . The bill Avas read a second time . The Vexatious Indictments Bill and the Evidence by Commission Bill were both read a third time and passed . . '" . '

    .. . . . , In the House of Cqmmoxs , in reply to Mr . Brady , Mr . S . Estcotjkt stated that a bill for the reform of the City of London Corporation Avas being prepared , and would be introduced after Easter * Lord Elcho , in a feAv remarks upon his speech on Monday , gave ( as he intended ) an opportunity to the Solicitor-General to explain certain expressions he had used in reference to Lord J . Russell—namely , " political aggrandisement and private advantage , " which some friends of Lord John , he said , thought were injurious to his personal honour and private character ; with which explanation Lord John was perfectly satisfied . .

    THE REFORM BILt ,. After a conversation of very confused and indeterminate character respecting the duration of the pending discussion , the adjourned debate on the Reform Bill , was resumed by Mr . Dn Cane , who claimed much credit to the Government for having taken in hand , tinder circumstances of peculiar difficulty , the settlement of the controversy respecting Parliamentary Reform . In tliis endeavour the administration , he submitted , had fairly succeeded , at any rate in so far as to merit the only concession Avhich they asked from the House- —namely , permission to have their bill considered in committee . -The question could be settled in no other way than by a

    compromise , and among the various propositions introduced in former sessions , or indicated in the course of the present- debate , the measure broug ht forward by the Government Aras , he maintained , on the whole most acceptable to the country . The resolution of Lord John Russell was , he thought , vexatious and vague ; and he trusted that the House would not , by adopting it , frustrate the chance now offered of passing a Reform Bill in the present session , Avith the inevitable result of leaving the question open until the time for compromise had passed aAvay . —Sir R . Peel remarked upon the bewildering ¦ conflict' of opinion which . had been expressed on different sides of the House respecting

    the bill under debate . He cited many passages from speeches that had been delivered in the course of the discussion , accompanying his quotations with a running commentaryj which afforded much amiisernent to the House . Contending that the resolution now proposed was perfectly regular and parliamentary , he declared ( and the declaration Avas received with cheers , in which Lord John Russpll joined ) , that its adoption would be immediately followed by the introduction of another bill "better calculated to satisfy the country . He was indeed prepared to wait , even for three years , in the hope of obtaining at Jiast a better measure than the crude and undigested scheme of the Government . Whatever

    dissonances might have existed' in times past among thO'Liberal party , they were now united at a moment of crisis , for an object in which they considered the gravest interests of the empire were involved . — ¦^ M r , Gaskem / said ho regretted that the Government had introduced a ' Reform Bill , which , ho believed , had not been called for , The Ministry , lie was persuaded , had brought in their bill rather in fulfllinont of pledges than in accordance with their convictions . But whether the bill Averc good or bad , susceptible of amendment or deserving' total rejection , ho exported the House to negative the resolution of Lord John Russell .- ^ Mr . StANiav sold , tho disfranchisement of tho borough free holders , Iioavovpr , and some other features of the bill , appoarqd to him very objectionable , n , nd ho should therefore

    support tho resolution , —Mr . EaiflRTON also disapproved of many details in the bill , but feeling anxious to secure an oarly settlement of the question , consentod to vote against the resolution . —Mr . Coniiisa'T declared his intention to vote for tho second , reading of the bill . —rMr . Cowans opposed tho resolution , bolieving it to bo designed nob to amend tho bill , but to destroy tho Ministry . «— Mr . "Wmstbun aupportod tho resolution , which was opposed by Mr . W . N . HonasoN . —Mr , Wrvivr . thought the bill good enough to bo mended in committee , and consented to support' tho second reading , — Mr . Hudson characterised the resolution as a cry and claptrap . Ho defended tho bill , which ho said was attacked merely in a scramble for place by men who , whilo calling themselves reformers , wore practically frustrating all endeavours to obtain roform .

    4a& The Leader. C^To-47ly April 2, 185q.

    4 a & THE LEADER . C ^ To-47 ly April 2 , 185 Q .

• Citation
  • Leader (1850-1860), April 2, 1859, page 6, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/cld_02041859/page/6/