denunciatory eloquence-uttered as some has no voice in the Constitution unless he think neither rightly nor reasonably-not is a householder. So far for the reasons only in this House, but on the platforms of in favour of this Bill; but there are many Birmingham, Manchester, and Rochdale-- serious and varied objections to it. In the and used as we are to regard those speeches first place, it is novel, and, in some respects as the oracular utterances of the advanced pedantic, neither of which is a quality much Liberal party in this House and the country relished in this House, and when they are -it is quite refreshing to find a gentle- found combined, the prospects of carrying man of advanced Liberal opinions-and no the Bill are somewhat remote. Again, the one can doubt that the hon. Member for measure does away entirely with the proHull is a gentleman of advanced Liberal perty qualification, and establishes for the opinions any more than they can doubt his first time an educational test alone as a title ability, honesty, and integrity of purpose to the franchise. In the next place it instead of denouncing our institutions and abandons the principle of class representaabusing his opponents-instead of en- tion, and adopts that of individual represendeavouring to palm off upon us the £6 tation. The principle of class representation franchise as a panacea for all political evils, has been endorsed hy a high authorityit is a refreshing change, I say, to find such the hon. Member for Birmingham-who, an authority bringing forward a measure in a recent speech at Rochdale, said that of Reform which makes intelligence and ours was not a system of individual but of education the passport to the suffrage. In class representation. Again, it will admit doing this my hon. Friend follows in the a clever man without any characterwake of Mr. Hare, of the hon. Member for a burglar, for instance, if unconvicted. Westminster (Mr. Stuart Mill), and other Counsellor Caseley, of whom we have heard political writers. None of those writers so much lately, might have passed such an have spoken more strongly against the examination; and, therefore, mere intellisuffrage being given without some educa-gence without property or character would tional test. The hon. Member for Westminster especially insists most strenuously in his writings upon every man obtaining that position in the State to which his acquirements entitled him—that a master of arts should have more influence than the voters proposed by the hon. Gentleman. Such a test as that proposed by the hon. Gentleman-and, indeed, I believe that it is one of the arguments which the hon. Gentleman himself urged in its favour-would be in itself a test as to the sincerity of the voter in his desire to obtain the franchise. There are many hon. Gentlemen who are sceptical of the honesty and sincerity of working men upon this point, and the passing of this measure would have the effect of showing whether these objections are well founded or not. My hon. Friend proposes an educational test, instead of the rude principle of franchise we have hitherto had; and it certainly has the advantage that it will give a good educational stimulus to the country. Then, again, it will not increase the anomalies of the present system, for instead of admitting, as the £6 franchise would do, the provident and the improvident alike, it will let in only those who are intelligent, provident, and in earnest. It will meet further that great difficulty, the extension of the franchise to lodgers. Under the present system a Rothschild or a Mill Lord Elcho

admit persons who had no interest in the security of the State. Lastly, I do not think it would necessarily be final. The hon. Gentleman looks to the measure as final, and gives as one reason for his belief that a standard of education once adopted, men would be ashamed to come and ask for it to be lowered. The hon. Gentleman further sees no danger of the standard being lowered, because the tendency of all examinations on those who have passed them is to screw up the test rather than down. The hon. Gentleman, however, does not consider what would take place in this House, although his view may be true as regards those out of doors. Judging by analogy, and reasoning from the past, we should have Members in this House attempting a short cut to distinction, by bringing forward Motions to lower the educational test, just as they now do to lower the borough franchise. One gentleman might move the omission of arithmetic from the examination, and another who had an inveterate hostility to the letter "h," might move that that letter should be cut out of the alphabet of the Civil Service; and we might have some future Member for Leeds, after a walk of two hours through the streets of Leeds, coming to the conclusion that the working classes were so universally wise that they might safely be admitted to the franchise without passing through any examination at all. There

fore I do not see that the doctrine of finality is a necessary result of the measure. If it is put to me whether I could support the Bill in the abstract I should vote against it; but it will have to be considered not in the abstract, but in connection with the Bill to be brought in by Her Majesty's Government. On the nature of that Bill will depend the view I should take of this measure. What that Bill can be no man can tell. Before Parliament met it was announced by the hon. Member for Birmingham (Mr. Bright) as a simple measure of enfranchisement, or what is called a 'single-barrelled Bill." Then the right hon. Member for Ashton (Mr. Milner Gibson), in his speech to his constituents, announced something of the same kind. [Mr. MILNER GIBSON: No, no!] Such was my impression. At another time it was announced as a "double-barrelled Bill;" and the report now is that it is to be two single barrels, and to be loaded with No. 6. Now I believe this £6 franchise which is to be contained in this Bill-whether a whole charge or a half-charge-is a measure fraught with danger to the State; and, as was said by the hon. Member (Mr. Clay) it was a concession of that kind which would lead to further changes until it arrived at the lowest symbol of property, whatever that may be. And therefore if it is put to me whether I would support a £6 franchise or the Bill of the hon. Member, I shall certainly vote for the latter. It is encouraging to find that the hon. Member for Hull, not satisfied with repeating the parrot cry of a "£6 franchise," has cut out for himself a new and untrodden road through the briars and thorns which have so long surrounded this question of Reform.

Motions on the paper should be opposed, for that is a matter which does not rest entirely with the Government. I confess I find it difficult to understand why the Ministry is so exceedingly reluctant to say anything with respect to the Bill. It is impossible to separate the proposal of my hon. Friend the Member for Hull from that great question of Reform which Her Majesty's Ministers led us to believe, until we read the Queen's Speech, was the most absorbing, the most overwhelming, the most pressing, and, in fact, the supreme question of the day. I should, therefore, have thought that when the question was brought forward to-day the right hon. Gentlemen on the Treasury Bench, and their friends below the gangway, would have shown great alacrity in expressing to the House the opinions which they have expressed out of doors. I can imagine one excuse for their reluctance. It may be that they feel a certain amount of soreness at the conduct of the hon. Gentleman the Member for Hull. He must be to some extent regarded to-night as an object of envy by Her Majesty's Government, and there may be a pardonable feeling of dissatisfaction at the contrast obvious to the most superficial observer suggested by the difference between my hon. Friend and the Government. My hon. Friend pledged himself, like the Government, to introduce a Reform Bill at the earliest period of the Session, but, unlike the Government, he has kept his pledge. The hon. Member, too, had, like the Government, to base his Bill on statistics, but unlike the Government, he had no paid officers to assist him, and, still more unlike the Government, his statistics are complete. Like the Government, again, he wishes to extend the franchise, but, unlike the GoMR. HORSMAN: Sir, I certainly ex-vernment, he bases his proposed extension pected to hear a few words from the Treasury Bench on this subject of basing the franchise on intelligence. Considering what the subject is, it is only due to the House that we should hear some expression of opinion from the Treasury Bench on the proposal of my hon. Friend. I do not think the circumstance that the other side of the House desire to go on at once with the cattle plague is a sufficient excuse for the silence maintained by the Members of the Government. I think, however, that my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer fell into a little irregularity in the beginning of the evening when he pledged himself beforehand that none of the

on a principle which he can explain and defend-and in that respect he has attained a statesmanship beyond that which Earl Russell has ever attained with his one idea of Reform, which is to give us a House of Commons elected by a mob. I can well understand that the position occupied by my hon. Friend tonight-that of a Reformer pledged to Reform, who, at the earliest moment, redeems his pledge that of a business-like Reformer who has prepared his Bill, and that of a statesmanlike Reformer who bases it upon a principle, may well excite feelings of embarrassment, accounting for the silence exhibited on the Treasury

Bench. But, Sir, if my right hon. Friend | had been treated with such contempt in the the Chancellor of the Exchequer is un. Queen's Speech, and as to which we were willing to express any opinion on this Bill, told the whole nation would be clamouring I am still more surprised at the silence of at our doors for a large and comprehensive the large and comprehensive Reformers Bill, he was wholly silent. Although the hon. below the gangway. How comes it that Member went up to boiling pitch on the they have given no response whatever to other subjects, his temperature as to Reform this proposal to base the franchise on in- was so frigid that no stimulant was suffitelligence, though it is what they have cient to get him up to bloodheat; and as been roaring about all their lives. When to the other large and comprehensive Rethe hon. Member for Hull resumed his seat, formers they all seemed afraid or ashamed I thought so many of them would be start- to touch the question. No doubt the hon. ing up for the honour of seconding the Member for Birmingham has his own reaMotion that you, Sir, would have been per- sons for avoiding the question; he is an plexed which of them to name, instead of old and wily politician, and has reasons which they all remained fixed to their for the course he adopts, which perhaps seats. Has their ardour been expended the other large and comprehensive Reand exhausted during the recess? Or did formers have not. There are, however, it receive its quietus on the day the other Reformers in the House who profess Queen's Speech was delivered? I must to act upon principle apart from tactics. say, judging from what we have seen, When, last year we obtained an easy victory that there was never so potent an instru- over the hon. Member for Leeds we were ment, and one with so magical an effect, told that during the last Parliament the as the Queen's Speech, for it mesmerized advanced Liberal party had eaten so much in a moment all the large and comprehen- dirt in the service of the Ministry that sive Reformers in Her Majesty's dominions. they were politically discredited and inThe hon. Member for Birmingham (Mr. solvent. But they said to us, "See what Bright) was the first to show that he was the elections have done-see what has stunned and silenced. When I was coming happened at Brighton, at Westminster, down to the House at four o'clock on the day and Lambeth-see what young blood has Parliament was opened, I had not had an been sent into the House. Reformers unopportunity of reading the Queen's Speech, contaminated, undemoralized by past Parbut I met a friend of mine who has a seat liamentary proceedings; see how they will on this side of the House, and who is a come out on Reform and redeem the chavery advanced Reformer. "How have racter of Parliament and the country! they treated you Gentlemen in the Speech," We were glad to hear of these valuable I asked. He replied, "Very badly indeed; accessions to our debates-the reputation they have shunted us into a siding." But, of these gentlemen had preceded them he added, "We shan't stand it, and there to this House we welcomed them with will be a row." "What do you mean by pride and with pleasure; we knew them a row?" I inquired. He replied, "Go to be men of great ability, and believed down at five o'clock, and just see how the what we were told of their zeal and Member for Birmingham will explode." sincerity; but still we watch and wait for Well, Sir, I came down to hear the Mem- them to redeem the character of the great ber for Birmingham explode, and there was Reform party, and others have waited and a great rush of new Members to witness the watched, and with what result? I can explosion; but the Member for Birmingham very well imagine these gentlemen conhad not the least idea of exploding. Hegregated at the Reform Club around the sat here for two whole nights mute and hon. Member for Birmingham, when one of melancholy, the "observed of all ob- their admirers comes up and says, "We gervers. ." Even when the right hon. Ba- hear wonderfully little about Reform in ronet the Member for Droitwich (Sir John this new Parliament. When are you Pakington), with the most benevolent in- coming out on Reform? Or what are you tention of enabling the large and compre- doing about Reform? "Oh," says the hensive Reformers to relieve their feelings, hon. Member for Birmingham (Mr. Bright), at last got the hon. Member for Birmingham drawing himself up, "I am waiting for on his legs, he was ready to explode upon statistics." Then the admiring inquirer Jamaica, he was great on the cattle plague, turns to the hon. Member for Westminster and he went off at half cock upon Ireland. (Mr. Stuart Mill), and says, But on that great question of Reform which you doing upon Reform! Mr. Horsman

"What are "Oh," he

66

be very few. The principal duty in fact which I have now to perform is to render a just tribute to the speech of my hon. Friend the Member for Hull (Mr. Clay). That speech, as I thought, was characterized by great force, great ability, and great clear

able ingenuity in handling a very difficult subject; but it was characterized above all by an evident earnestness and sincerity, and a sense of the serious nature of the position in which he was speaking. For all these qualities I thank my hon. Friend, but especially for the display of those qualities in that portion of his address which related to the moral character of that class whose cause he was more immediately advocating. My right hon. Friend who has just sat down has sought to lead me a little beyond the performance of this duty by the contrast which he has benevolently been pleased to imagine between the posi tion of my hon. Friend the Member for

replies, "I am helping the hon. Member for Birmingham,' Then the inquirer goes to the hon. Member for Brighton (Mr. Fawcett), and asks, "What are you doing about Reform?" and he answers, "I am helping the hon. Member for Westminster." Then the inquirer goes to the hon. Mem-ness of statement, as well as by considerber for Lambeth (Mr. Thomas Hughes), and says, suppose you are like the rest of them, and that probably you are helping the Member for Brighton." The hon. Member for Lambeth replies, "Probably I am." Then, going through the club, the inquirer turns to a more candid Reformer, perhaps the senior Member for Brighton (Mr. White), and he asks him the same question, "What are you legislators doing about Reform?" "Oh," he says, "I will tell you what we are doing; we are helping the helpmates of the Member for Birmingham to smother Reform under a fictitious pile of imaginary statistics." These are the philosophical Reformers, who have been sent to this House for the pur-Hull, who has fulfilled all his pledges, and pose of advancing this great cause of Reform, who have shown their philosophy by the patience with which they have endured the delay of this great question, against which delay others have protested, and forming apparently no very high estimate of the sincerity which this patience exhibits. Of course, those gentlemen who would base the franchise on intelligence do not get much assistance from the hon. Member for Birmingham and those who agree with him. The latter want to go a great deal faster than the former. We know that intelligence is fatal to agitation, that as the schoolmaster advances the agitator recedes, and that an educated multitude no more believes in demagogues than in ghosts. But we do expect from men whose high reputation has given them another position in this House that they should follow Reform with a pure spirit, and, politically speaking, with a higher morality than has distinguished this agitation during the last few years; and it is nothing short of a public calamity when men of their high order lend themselves, as they appear to be doing now, by the indifference they are showing, to the degradation of the Parliament they were intended to adorn.

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: My right hon. Friend who has just sat down has expressed a hope that he would hear a few words from the Treasury Bench upon this occasion, and that hope of my right hon. Friend shall be gratified, while I can assure him also that those words will

that of Her Majesty's Government, who he thinks already, before they have spoken one word, have contrived to violate all the pledges which they have given. I cannot admit the existence of that mortification which he supposes we must suffer in contemplating the triumphant honesty and integrity of the hon. Member for Hull. I can feel in this instance the satisfaction which the conduct of a good man naturally inspires, but that satisfaction is entirely unalloyed by any sting or reproach of conscience in consequence of anything we have done or not done on the question of Reform. In the speech of Her Majesty it was stated that the Government were engaged in gathering information upon this subject. Our responsibility with respect to that part of the question is very well tested by two considerations:-first, the time at which the Cabinet was formed and the state of public business on the death of Lord Palmerston; and next whether after the tenor of the debates which took place in the year 1860, it was or it was not material and important, with a view to the satisfactory handling of this subject, that an effort should be made to place Parliament and the country in possession of the best and most accurate information which we could command. We came to the conclusion that such an effort was desirable, and if my right hon. Friend thinks fit to challenge our judgment, and says that that was a proceeding intended only for evasion or delay, it is quite competent to him to do so, and we shall be

MR. WALPOLE said, he would not oppose the Motion, as it would be desirable they should see the Bill, but he did not suppose that the alteration could recommend it more than the former Bill, or that he could do otherwise than oppose it. Motion agreed to.

ready to meet him whenever he invites the | pealed one of the clauses of the University House to assent to such an opinion. But Clauses Act which required the same if our views were just, our duty was a per-declaration to be taken by all clerical fectly simple and disinterested one. We persons. The form therefore in which he have in accordance with it prosecuted this should now draw his Bill would not be inquiry. The systematic management and as heretofore, to except the fellows of arrangement of a number of particulars colleges at the University, but simply to with reference to the situation of counties repeal two clauses of the Act of Uniformity, and boroughs, if the Returns are to be which required the heads of colleges, and rendered worthy of this House and are to heads of colleges alone, to make that present that accuracy and precision of declaration. He hoped, under these circumwhich the subject admits, cannot be ac-etances, his right hon. Friend opposite (Mr. complished without a considerable lapse of Walpole), who had hitherto opposed him, time. Not one moment has been lost, and would now be disposed to assist him. the announcement of the time when it will be my duty to make a proposal to the House on the subject of Reform has depended and will depend upon the day when we shall be able to produce this information. A very few days only, I hope, will now elapse before I shall be able to state when that day has arrived. But upon the present occasion I have only to say for myself, " my bosom's lord sits lightly on its throne." I have no sins to answer for on my part, or on the part of my Colleagues, as far as any delay hitherto is concerned. With respect to the very mild and modest invitation of my hon. Friend the Member for Hull (Mr. Clay), and the more detailed and elaborate invitation of the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Horsman) who followed him in the debate for some expression of opinion from me, on the part of the Government, in reference to the merits of the proposal of my hon. Friend, I can only say that neither the respect I feel for the one, nor the admiration I entertain of the ability of the other, nor any other motive or consideration, be it what it may, will succeed in extracting from me a single word.

ACT OF UNIFORMITY.-COMMITTEE.

MR. E. P. BOUVERIE moved that the Speaker leave the Chair, with a view to moving in Committee of the whole House for leave to bring in a Bill to repeal certain portions of the Act of Uniformity. He said that the position of this question was now somewhat altered as compared with last year when he had the honour of introducing a Bill on the question. Last year an Act was passed with reference to the subscription of the clergy. That Act reThe Chancellor of the Exchequer

Bill considered in Committee.

(In the Committee.)

Resolved, That the Chairman be directed to

move the House, that leave be given to bring in a Bill to repeal certain portions of the Act of Uniformity.

House resumed.

Resolution reported: - Bill ordered to be brought in by Mr. BOUVERIE and Mr. DUDLEY

FORTESCUE.

BANK NOTES (IRELAND).—COMMITTEE.

SIR COLMAN O'LOGHLEN moved

for leave to bring in a Bill to make Bank of England notes a legal tender in Ireland, and to authorize banks of issue in Ireland to make their notes payable only at the places in Ireland at which the account of gold and silver coin held by such bankers is taken by the Commissioners of Stamps and Taxes.

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHE

QUER said, he did not desire to deprive the hon. Baronet of the opportunity of stating his views and laying his plans before the House. He agreed with him in thinking that there were certain circumstances in the present state of the law with respect to the circulation in Ireland which, upon the first fair opportunity, might attract the attention of Parliament. But he was bound to say, in order that no misunderstanding might arise with reference to the Government making the subject a matter of deliberation, that in his opinion it would not only be an innovation to make Bank of England notes a legal tender in Ireland, but he conceived there to be very strong and practical objections to a measure of