the table, but while there is a chancewhile the measure may not be yet settled look at the present state of that distribution, and see where the weight of the representation lies, will perceive that where the while the information is incomplete on wealth, the industry, the activity, the intel- which it is to be founded, I wish to urge ligence, and the ability of the United King- this on Her Majesty's Government-that dom lie, the weight and preponderance of if they make their attempt with what the the representation are not be found. I see late Member for Huddersfield (Mr. Leaat the bottom of this desire for Reform- tham) called a single-barrelled Reform particularly with the middle classes, with Bill," they will be defeated, and they will the manufacturing, shipbuilding, mining, only perpetuate the evils which they seek and industrial classes-the people who make to remedy. This will be the result if they the greatness of this country-I see that shall listen unwisely to the charming of much of their dissatisfaction arises from my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingthe fact, that the preponderance of political ham (Mr. Bright), who, if I understand his power is not in accordance with the in- utterances out of doors, has endeavoured dustry, the intelligence, and the wealth of to persuade his countrymen that it is desirthe nation, but is distributed according to able to take a one-barrelled Bill rather some method which in old times was in than wait for a reform of all the electoral harmony with these things, but has long abuses now complained of. I think we ceased to be so. Take the county with ought to do this thing en masse and in the which I am most intimately connected by whole, and not bit by bit. It may suit my property and residence-Wilts. There are hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, for returned from that county and its boroughs whom I have a great respect and regardeighteen Members-exactly the same num-to profess admiration for his ability would be ber, I believe, returned by South Lanca- on my part simply impertinent-loving, as shire, which contains more than five times he appears to do, public appearances and its population, and to which it cannot platform oratory-it may suit him to keep for a moment be compared in respect of this subject alive, for if the Bill were a onewealth, activity, and energy. Great as is barrelled Bill, he would still have one barrel the regard which I entertain for my native left to load if he pleased and to discharge in county, nobody could say if the two dis- this House; but this is exactly what does tricts were compared that the representa- not suit the country, and will not suit this tion of South Lancashire ought not vastly House. Let me assure my hon. Friend and to exceed that of Wilts. Take, for another the Government that the desire of the people example, the part of the country with which of this country will be to have this quesI am politically connected-the county of tion settled and done with, and not kept Ayr? It is populous, wealthy, active, and up as a source of uneasiness and disconindustrious-industrious in all respects that tent, preventing the introduction of other make Great Britain what she is; it has a measures-measures for the improvement thriving population busily engaged in mi- of the condition of our countrymen, which ning, shipbuilding, manufacturing, plough- it is the duty of Parliament to pass, and ing, delving, and weaving; and what is the which, after all, it is the whole object of representation of Ayr? It has one county those constitutional arrangements to proMember, the one-fifth of one borough mote. Therefore, I emphatically sayMember, and two-fifths of another borough and I am sure I speak the sentiments of a Member, or an aggregate of one Member great many in this House and out of it and three-fifths. Well, I say that these when I say so that if the Government anomalies, if there be a Reform Bill, must introduced such a measure as it is supposed be grappled and dealt with. And this con- they contemplate, not only will their Bill sideration must be borne in mind-that if not be satisfactory-not only will it not you are going to lower the county franchise receive the general support of the country, to £10 or £15, unless there shall be a but they will make a shipwreck of the opnew distribution of power as between the portunity, now within their reach, if they occupiers of houses and the owners of land, seize it, of settling for the present century you will throw the whole power into the the question of Reform. hands of the householders, and deprive the landed proprietors of that weight in the country which hitherto they have possessed, as representing property. I am not going to discuss the Reform Bill before it is laid on SIR HENRY HOARE claimed the indulgence of the House, whilst addressing a few observations to them for the first time. While deprecating the idea that he was about to prejudge or impugn the scheme of the Government, he desired to say that he cordially agreed with the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Kilmarnock (Mr. E. P. Bouverie) in what he had said with respect to no measure of Reform being satisfactory which did not present, at least for the present time, some prospect of finality. It was, however, to be feared from what they had heard, that the measure of the Government was one borrowed from the archives of the hon. Member for Birmingham. Whatever the Reform Bill might be he (Sir Henry Hoare) hoped it would not be such an one as would serve as a stepping-stone to future arrangements of a revolutionary character. He should be prepared to vote for such an alteration in the franchise as would admit a large accession of intellect and honesty; but not for such an one as would allow the influence of property to be outweighed by numbers. There were in that House a majority of sixty or seventy Members returned at the last general election to support the late Prime Minister, and it might be supposed that those hon. Gentlemen would remember the injunction, Nimium ne crede colori -that they would not follow blindly in the wake, or support the propositions of the Minister of the day. A great and eminent man, the late Sir George Lewis, when speaking some four or five years ago observed that it was the duty of the Minister who proposed a Reform Bill to adduce the evils which he sought to remedy, and to show that the remedy he suggested was likely to be attended with the results which it was intended to bring about. In framing a Reform Bill, population, intelligence, and property should be combined, and he must say that, in his opinion, the important agricultural counties had a right to look for increased representation. MR. NEATE said, he concurred in the belief that the question of Reform would not have been satisfactorily settled until there was a re-distribution of seats, and an extinction of a considerable number of the smaller boroughs. Whether the measures for a complete Parliamentary Reform should all be brought in at one time was, however, quite another question. He thought the Ministry were acting rightly if they separated the question of an extension of the franchise from that of its re-distribution; because, before Parliament proceeded to re-distribute the franchise it ought to know what the increase of the constituencies would be. Again, he thought Sir Henry Hoare it would be well to have a separate measure for the counties and a separate one for the boroughs. The county franchise was different in important respects from that of the boroughs; and a man might be inclined to vote for the extension of the one though being of opinion that there was no necessity for an extension of the other. Such a person might vote against the second reading of a Bill embracing the extension of the two. Sir Francis Baring once announced in the House that it would be most convenient to deal separately with the two branches of the great question of Reform. He quite concurred in that opinion, and, indeed, he thought it might be beneficial to subdivide the question even to a greater extent. MR. P. A. TAYLOR agreed entirely with what had been said by previous speakers with regard to the unsatisfactory character of any Bill which should deal with the franchise only, and leave to the future the question of the re-distribution of seats. In his opinion, the coming Bill should be large enough to settle the question for some years to come. He quite admitted that there was an inconsistency in bringing in one Bill which should lower the franchise in certain boroughs and another which should deprive them of representation altogether; but he endorsed the opinion of the hon. Member for Birmingham, that the people who had waited so long and so patiently for Reform should be content with any step that was definite and positive, and not wait for any Utopian scheme of perfect Reform. He did not believe that any Bill dealing with the franchise only would be entirely satisfactory; but he would accept it, because he believed, with the hon. Member for Birmingham, that in the present constitution of the House it would be impossible to carry one of a more satisfactory character. There were, unfortunately, on our side of the House a number of men calling themselves Liberals, but who talked mere Toryism, and contended that legislation should be "for the people, not by the people." Again, there were Gentlemen on the opposite Benches who were unwilling to sacrifice the seats of nomination boroughs, or boroughs of corruption. He had no doubt that the hon. Member for Birmingham had been agreeably surprised at the exhibition of sentiment which had been made in the House that evening, every speaker having tacitly implied that there was a necessity for a Reform Bill, and that a Reform Bill, to be worthy of the acceptance of the House, must be a comprehensive and searching measure, and deal not only with the suffrage, but also the re-distribution of ment becomes crowded. What I will do is this. I will have the Bills printed, naming rather an early day for the second reading. The Bills are short, and the right hon. Gentleman will have an opportunity Address agreed to; to be presented by them, he should think it desirable that of looking at them; and if, on looking at Privy Councillors. Beats. SAVINGS BANKS AND POST OFFICE SAVINGS BANK ACTS.-REPORT. Resolution [Feb. 8] reported. MR. AYRTON asked the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he had any objection to lay upon the table the accounts relating to Post Office savings banks in a somewhat more satisfactory form than that in which they were now given. They appeared to show a profit of £40,000, whereas, in fact, there was a loss to that amount; for, as he understood the accounts, it appeared that the whole of the annuities and interest received from year to year was credited as income, while nothing was deducted for the depreciation of those annuities, which were terminable, and would soon come to an end. If, however, the amount of that depreciation, which was estimated at £80,000, was placed against the apparent profit, it would show a loss, instead of a profit, of £40,000. It was extremely to be regretted that the accounts were made up in such a manner that there should be room for misapprehension. Certainly, they were not presented to the House in the form adopted by jointstock banks and other institutions which carry on business of a similar kind. It was necessary that there should be placed upon the table a proper annual account of profit and loss. Unless hon. Members saw that all charges and deductions were fairly set off against the income, they would be unable to ascertain the amount of profit and loss. He was anxious that the right hon. Gentleman should take into consideration the expediency of remodelling the form in which these accounts were presented. MR. HENLEY hoped that when the Bill had been brought in a reasonable time would be allowed to elapse after it was printed, so that Members might have a fair opportunity of considering it before the second reading. The matter was in some of its parts very technical. THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: I am always desirous to bring forward Bills of this nature, which I have no reason to suppose would call forth much criticism, before the business of Parlia more time should be given, I will accede to any opinion he may express on the subject. With regard to the Question put by the hon. and learned Member for the Tower Hamlets, I am not sure that I distinctly gather the precise nature of his objection to the form of the accounts, because not having that form before me I cannot lay my finger on any particular part of it, and therefore I cannot say absolutely what is my judgment as to any power of presenting the accounts in a different form. In point of fact, there will always be certain facts open to discussion with respect to funds which are represented in the form of Government Annuities; and, perhaps, there will be more room for discussions of that kind in proportion as we convert perpetual annuities into terminable annuities, because terminable annuities are not commodities suited for immediate conversion except at an unfavourable rate of interest. That consideration has hitherto prevented the Government and Parliament from attempting any large conversion of the National Debt into the form of terminable annuities, Now that we are becoming recipients on a larger scale of the savings of the people, it does seem convenient to apply more extensively this system of converting perpetual into terminable annuities. At any rate, I wish it to be understood, and borne in mind by the House, that it introduces elements of difficulty with regard to the precise computation of the value of a commodity which can only be brought into the market on unfavourable terms. It may be laid down as a principle that we should never convert into terminable any perpetual annuities, which we may be called upon to replace to meet our obligations. spect to the expense of Post Office savings banks, I have no hesitation in expressing perfect confidence, that an investigation of figures, on a fair and just valuation of the assets of the National Debt Commissioners, and the Government savings banks, will show, notwithstanding the extensive security required, and the large number of branches all through the country, everyone of which is, in point of fact, an agency for the central Post Office in London, that we are a perfectly solvent concern. We do not seek With re "To inquire and report as to what legislative measures are desirable for the purpose of restraining the directors of railway companies from exceeding the limits of the borrowing powers fixed by to make, and it would not be right to aim | lect Committee was appointed by their at making, a profit; what we do aim at is Lordships to give the depositing public every possible facility, and the State absolute security. With respect to the precise forms in which the accounts are now laid before the House, if the hon. and learned Member will kindly suggest to me the points which he thinks are weak and require explanation, I will take an opportunity of attending to them. Resolution agreed to. Bill ordered to be brought in by Mr. CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER and Mr. CHILDERS. their Act of Parliament." The Committee which sat in two Sessions, made two Reports, to the effect, that it was very desirable that railway companies should be compelled to make annual returns to some public officer, and that there should be a system of compulsory registration of railway obligations. As the Government did not take up the matter, and his noble Friend was prevented from following up the Select Committee of Public Accounts nomi- subject, he (the Earl of Belmore) took the nated :—Mr. WALPOLE, Mr. BOUVERIE, Sir STAF-liberty last Session, at the suggestion of FORD NORTHCOTE, Lord ROBERT MONTAGU, Mr. HOWES, Mr. POLLARD-URQUHART, Mr. LAING, Mr. HANKEY, and Mr. CHILDERS. PUBLIC ACCOUNTS. House adjourned at a quarter HOUSE OF LORDS, Monday, February 12, 1866. MINUTES.Several Lords took the Oath. RAILWAY COMPANIES' BORROWING POWERS.-QUESTION. his noble Friend, of introducing a Bill (the Railway Debentures, &c., Registry Bill), embodying the recommendations of the Commissioners. That Bill passed their Lordships' House, but went down to the Commons late in the Session, and was withdrawn after a first reading, as it was felt, notwithstanding that it had met with the approval of the then Lord Chancellor, who had added an important Amendment obliging companies to register all their obligations, that it would receive severe opposition from the powerful railway interest in the House of Commons. The objections were very fairly stated in a newspaper which devoted itself to financial questions. They were four in number. In the first place, it was said that a system of compulsory registration would give to railway debentures and obligations an apparent validity which they did not intrinsically possess, and that the registrar whom the Bill proposed to intrust with receiving the annual returns and registering the bonds could not possibly ascertain whether any bonds submitted to him were or were not within the limits of the borrowing powers of the company pre THE EARL OF BELMORE, in rising to ask Her Majesty's Government whether it was the intention of the President of the Board of Trade to introduce during the present Session any measure to give effect to the recommendations of the Select Committee of that House (1864) on the subject of Railway Companies borrowing powers, said, the subject was one which, though not of any great popular interest, was neverthe-senting them. All, however, that his Bill less of considerable importance, and he desired to bring to their Lordships' recollection what had already taken place concerning this matter during the last three Sessions. In the Session of 1863, a noble Earl (the Earl of Donoughmore), who was unfortunately too unwell to be present that evening, brought to the notice of their Lordships the Special Report and Evidence on the West Hartlepool Harbour and Railway Bill, by which it appeared that the directors of that company had greatly exceeded their borrowing powers; and a SeThe Chancellor of the Exchequer proposed to do was exactly what had been done for the last 150 years with regard to the registration of deeds relating to land in Ireland; every deed had to be registered in the Rolls Office in Dublin, and the deed took priority according to the date of registration. That was precisely what he had proposed to do with regard to the registration of railway obligations, and registration would no more make the debenture valid than would the registration of a false deed in Ireland make it a good one. The only object of his Bill was to show the numbers and EARL RUSSELL was understood to say that he had consulted his right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade, who had informed him that he was engaged upon the subject, but was not prepared to say that he would at present bring in any measure dealing with it this Session. amount of the securities issued by the com- | to the Recommendation of the Select Company, so that proposing lenders might be mittee of this House (1864) on "Railway able to ascertain what was in priority to Companies' Borrowing Powers; and 2, them. The second objection was that the Whether, if such a Measure should be inBill would take from the directors of rail- troduced, it would be framed so as to meet way companies the sense of responsibility the Case of the Obligations of Joint Stock which they were now supposed to possess; Companies generally? but the writer himself went on to say that he knew something of the borrowing operations of railway companies, and that directors often did not know the extent of their responsibilities, and the same objection might be urged against any Bill proposing to restrict the powers of railway companies. The third point was that the Bill if carried would interfere with the proper conduct of business. He would be the last to propose anything which would interfere with the action of railway companies in conducting their business, or obstruct trade in any way; but he was of opinion that the increased value of their securities would have gained if the proposed Bill had become law, would have more than compensated them for any minor inconvenience they would suffer. The fourth objection was that these debentures would take a priority over other debts to which they were not entitled, and which the shareholders had never supposed that they possessed. The law provided, however, that certain borrowing powers should not be exceeded, and it might fairly be presumed to have been the intention of Legislature that those who lent their money under the several Acts were entitled to priority over other obligations. He believed it had been decided that the holder of Lloyds' bonds, so long as they were bond fide, that was to say given in payment for work done, could enter an execution against all the effects of a railway company. The whole subject was a matter of great importance, so much so that he thought it should not be taken up by a private Member of their Lordships' House, and he hoped he should hear from the Government that the President of the Board of Trade intended to introduce a Bill on the subject, and the more so, because he understood that when the Registry Bill was in the House of Commons last Session, the President of the Board of Trade had (he did not say in his plan, because there was no discussion on the Bill), informed the noble Lord who had charge of it in that House that he should probably deal with the subject. He would now ask, Whether it is the Intention of the President of the Board of Trade to introduce, during the present Session, any Measure to give effect LORD OVERSTONE said, he regretted to hear the answer which had just been given by the noble Earl at the head of the Government upon that subject. By the Legislature of the country power was given to railway companies to borrow, under certain conditions, large sums of money on the security of their bonds. But the investors in the bonds had no means of verifying whether or not those conditions had been complied with, and, consequently, whether the security thus offered was not utterly worthless. That was not a mere theoretical objection. It was one which had actually been realized upon several remarkable occasions. If he was not mistaken, even since the question had last been under the consideration of their Lordships an important case had arisen, in which a great company had gone far beyond its legal power of borrowing, and the directors had defended their conduct by alleging that they were driven by pressure to adopt the course they had followed. They were under an obligation at a certain period to meet a large amount of claims on them, whatever might then be the state of the money market, and they thought it desirable to raise money beforehand in an easy state of the money market, so that they might be prepared to meet their engagements. Fresh bonds were accordingly issued beyond their legal powers; and upon that a serious question might arise whether the security had not thus been invalidated. Under these circumstances, it was reasonable that the public should look to the Legislature to afford them the means of exercising that precaution with regard to the validity of those securities which the Legislature itself had made necessary. They had had a Committee of that House sitting upon the subject; that Committee had examined wit nesses, who represented some of the largest railways in the kingdom, and those wit |