not materially embarrass their party. On all important occasions they are to be found in the right lobby of division. But there are advanced Liberals who have not been returned, and who never will be returned under the present electoral arrangements; and these are they who are clamourous for a lowering of the suffrage, opposing at the same time its extension in the direction of intelligence and learning. We shall cite one notable instance. A respected and most intelligent citizen of Edinburgh, who is Mr Bright's near connection, has been particularly active as a political agitator. He has offered himself as a candidate for the representation of Edinburgh, but was rejected, and he now comes forward as an advocate for a material lowering of the franchise. He has stated repeatedly that Scotland has been unjustly treated in respect that she is not proportionably represented in Parliament in comparison with England; and yet, when a proposal was made that the Universities of Scotland should be represented, as are those of England and Ireland, this patriotic gentleman considered it his duty to enter his protest against such a scheme. He was wise in his generation. Light was to him more odious than darkness. If the tenpounders would not listen to his call, what was he, or such as he, to expect from the most highly educated of the land?

No doubt there is a class very anxious to obtain the franchise. It consists of those persons who are very nearly but not altogether up to the ten-pound property standard men who feel, with sufficient reason, that they are quite as capable from education and intelligence of exercising the franchise as are those immediately above them, and they consider it a real grievance that they should be excluded from the register, simply because they do not pay a few additional shillings of rent. For those who are so situated we have a decided sympathy; and their case ought unquestionably to receive anhas indeed ent Gotions

xious consideration. been considered by vernment; one of t being that lodgers, a

money to a certain amount in savings' banks, may be admitted to the franchise. But we shall not discuss these propositions now-we allude to them merely to show that there is no indisposition, at least on the part of the Conservatives, to withhold the suffrage from that class which is most anxious to obtain it, while at the same time it is qualified to use it.

The real opponents to the lowering of the suffrage in urban constituencies are the ten-pound borough occupants, who having their own way at present, are anything but desirous to depreciate the value of their privilege by admitting others. It is significant to remark that few of the men who clamour for forty-shilling freeholds within boroughs, to affect, or "leaven," as they call it, the county constituencies, are in favour of a general lowering of the borough qualification; and that not one of them has proposed the institution of a forty-shilling borough franchise! From all which we gather that public opinion, as regards the nature of reforms in our representative system, is confused, contradictory, and disjointed; and that in point of fact the few who have come forward at public meetings with distinct proposals have for the most part, if not universally, been swayed by considerations of what would be best for themselves or for their party, rather than by a sincere desire to have this difficult matter adjusted according to the principles of equity and justice, for the contentment of the public mind.

The expediency of a further Reform in Parliament having been recognised by two Premiers, and even recommended from the Throne, it was absolutely impossible for the Government of which Lord Derby is the head, to disregard such antecedents. Had they done so, and broadly declined to introduce any measure of reform, they would have been at once unseated-nay, we may further say, that unless they had made up their minds to grapple with this difficulty, they could not with honour have accepted office. They did not shrink from the task, arduous though it was, or the responsibility, howe perilous. They addressed themsel

deliberately to the work of ascertaining what grievances, if any, required to be remedied, what modifications of the present system were required, and what extension of the franchise could be safely and advantageously granted. Meanwhile vast preparations were being made for agitating the public mind. Mr Bright, at the instance of divers Radical leaders, undertook to prepare a Reform Bill of his own; and not only that, but to preach its doctrine, and to expound its tendencies, to many large constituencies, both in England and Scotland. He was as good as his word. He prepared a Bill, the outline of which being published, for the document has not appeared in extenso, made the ten-pounders look aghast; and he delivered sundry speeches of so wild and inflammatory a tendency, and conceived in so intolerant a spirit, that even Radicals uttered a rebuke. He contradicted himself over and over again, made so many egregious blunders, and hazarded such preposterous fallacies, that the men who should have been his followers were forced to admit that Friend John had rather gone astray, and that his wits were the worse for wear.

The threatened agitation proved to be an entire failure. Mr Bright drew large audiences, just as Mr Spurgeon or any other celebrated orator would have done. People went brimful of curiosity to see and hear the famous Apostle of the Anti-corn-law League, who has the reputation of being one of the best and most effective public speakers of England. They went and satisfied their curiosity, but they did not carry away with them the doctrine. They were no more converted to the opinions of Mr Bright, than are the audiences of Mr Spurgeon disposed to genuine repentance. The fact is, that every one was waiting with real anxiety for the announcement of the Ministerial measure. The secret was well kept, for in the course of its preparation no hint as to the nature of the bill was given. Of course there were all manner of rumours. Ingenious canards found their way into the public prints, and were greedily devoured by the more credulous portion of the community.

The most prevalent idea was that the Ministry had made up their minds entirely to outbid Lord John Russell for popularity, and to propose a sweeping measure, bringing down the franchise to a very low point, both in counties and in towns. This notion occasioned a great deal of uneasiness-we might almost say misery-to the ten-pounders, who, indifferent as to the fate of the county constituencies, were by no means anxious to be themselves inundated by the opening of the fountains of the unenfranchised; and from the lips of many a Whig there issued sentiments of so very exclusive a nature, that no Tory would have dared to utter them. When, therefore, the period for disclosure came, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer had explained the nature of the bill, the moderate Liberals gave a sigh of supreme relief, as if a heavy load had been removed from their minds, and uttered an ejaculatory thanksgiving for their deliverance from radical innovations. And having performed that pious ceremony, they straightway sate down to devise how they might best defeat the Ministry, and clamber once more into office!

Simultaneously with the announcement of the measure, it became known that entire unanimity had not prevailed in the Cabinet. Two Ministers, of acknowledged ability, high character, and unimpeachable integrity, were not able conscientiously to agree to certain important propositions which the bill contained; and so strong were their convictions, that they considered it necessary to resign. The loss of two such men as Mr Walpole and Mr Henley, both greatly esteemed and respected, was no doubt damaging to the Ministry, and gave confidence to their political opponents, who saw at once that, failing any other plausible ground of attack, they had only to adopt the views of the retiring Ministers in order to make a breach in the bill, and possibly to disunite the Conservative party. We cannot treat lightly the secession of two such honourable gentlemen. We cannot even blame them for the course which they adopted. Much as unity is to be desired in council, we cannot wish

that it should be attained at the sacrifice of principle,-which must be the case where individual convictions are felt to be insuperably strong. They have acted in accordance with their convictions, purely and nobly; and we know that the sacrifice which they have made will be fully appreciated by the country. We do not wish to offer a decided opinion upon the points on which they differed from their colleagues. We merely refer now to their secession from the Ministry as a fact of much importance, which it is quite possible that the Opposition may wrest to their own advantage.

The main feature of the ministerial measure, and that which distinguishes it from every scheme which hitherto has been proposed, is, that it contemplates no disfranchisement either of place or person. This is eminently conservative and constitutional. The plan proposed by Lord John Russell was a wholesale disfranchisement of many boroughs, and a diminution in the representation of others, in order that the abstracted seats might be given to new constituencies, or to existing constituencies which are very large. The Ministry have followed a different course. They have determined not to suppress any borough, but simply to deprive some small ones of the double representation, and to give members to some rising towns hitherto unrepresented, and a limited increase to the larger counties. We are very much disposed to think that no better adjustment could be made, on the basis that the numbers of the House of Commons ought not to be increased-a point which we may perhaps revert to in another paper, if the progress of legislation will allow. We fully concur with the ministerial view that the disfranchisement of small boroughs is unwise, unless it can be shown that they have either sunk into hopeless decay, or are notoriously venal and corrupt. As to what are called "secret influences," by which is meant merely the preponderance of property, we shall simply remark that such influences are at work, if they do not prevail, in every ency in the kingdom. It is suppose that property wi

to in

fluence votes; the utmost we can expect is that it shall not coerce them. It is notorious that large popular constituencies do not always

nay, do very seldom-return men of real eminence to Parliament; in so much so, that even metropolitan members can hardly be exhibited as models of senatorial capacity. In this respect, therefore, we think that the Ministerial scheme is entitled to the popular support.

So also with that part of it which reserves all existing rights of voting. No man loses his vote, though he may be required to exercise it otherwise than at present. We most cordially agree with the proposition that freehold forty-shilling votes, within the boundaries of boroughs, ought to be registered for the borough, not for the county in which that borough happens to be situated. We care nothing about the antiquity of the practice. It is essentially a bad, nay, an iniquitous one; and if antiquity is to be the rule, which is a singular view for Radicals to adopt, why, we may ask, should we not recur to the old Saxon form of the Witten-gemote, or the Danish institution of the Thing? Is it not common sense that all property within borough limits should be liable to borough restrictions, and have no other than borough privileges? It has been said that a borough, being erected as such, is still part of the county. In reality it is nothing of the kind. Does it pay county-rates? That is the true test; for if it does not bear the peculiar burdens of the county, it is absolutely dissevered from it, and is not entitled to any county privilege. The forty-shilling freehold is unknown in Scotland; and we shall never forget the astonishment which was excited, only a year ago, when some advanced Radicals proposed that the system should be extended to the northern kingdom, and that proprietors of tenements of the annual value of forty shillings, situated within boroughs, should have county votes. The proposition was made in an assembly certainly not of a Conservative complexion. It was mooted at the Convention of Royal Burghs, a peculiar but very ancient Scottish institution,

re

meets annually for deliberation, every burgh being there represented; and so monstrous was the proposal deemed, that it was at once jected. We notice this, because the opinion of an ultra-liberal Scottish borough assembly, venerable in point of antiquity and expressly sanctioned by the legislature, is valuable as real evidence against the propriety of the fusion, or rather confusion, of borough and county votes; and to this part of the Ministerial scheme we accord, without the slightest hesitation, our most cordial approval.

Next in order comes the extension of the suffrage. The Ministry have, very wisely, departed from the old brick-and-mortar restrictions, and propose to accord the franchise, 1st, To certain educated classes; 2d, To certain holders of personal property in the funds and otherwise; 3d, To lodgers, not householders, of a certain amount; and 4th, To those of the working-classes who have deposited a certain sum in the savings' banks. These have been designated, most falsely, wantonly, and untruly, as "fancy qualifications." They are nothing of the kind. With regard to the first class, they secure the admission of qualified men who may not be able to claim under any other character. With regard to the second, they admit personal property, which ought to represent intelligence as much as local habitation. With regard to the third, they let in clerks, artists, and high artisans, who have not undertaken the cares of the independent householder. With regard to the fourth, they have done much to encourage industry and frugality, and have clearly opened, for the first time, to the working-classes, a way to the franchise which is attainable.

But, while we say this, with full approval of the three first methods for attaining the franchise which the Ministry have proposed, we are of opinion that it is advisable to open a wider door for the admission of the working classes. There is much force in the objection which has been taken, that it is unreasonable to expect that workmen should always have the sum of £60 at their credit with the savings' bank. Many men, reputably rich,

and in a much higher position in society, would lose their votes if the same scrutiny were used with regard to their bankers' books. It cannot be expected that artisans shall be permanent investers. Take the instance of a young man who, by unremitting industry, temperance, and self-denial, has accumulated upwards of £60 in the savings' bank, and in right of that has been entered on the register. In due season he marries, and has occasion for his money in order to purchase furniture. Is it not an immense hardship that he should therefore lose his vote? It strikes us very forcibly that, in addition to the savings' bank deposit qualification, there should be another extending the franchise to those who are provident enough to insure their lives for the benefit of their families. That is quite as good a test of a workman's forethought and frugality as his bank-book; and it has this great advantage, that it is of a permanent kind, that the premium must be paid yearly in order to maintain the policy. We do hope that this suggestion will be favourably considered, for it is undoubtedly of much consequence that the workingclasses should have every encouragement to sober and thrifty habits, and be induced to take advantage of those means for securing provision to their families which every prudent individual in the middle classes adopts from a full knowledge of its value.

It cannot be said that this mode of investment, for such it really is, would preclude the working man from saving money in other ways. Let us suppose that the Legislature should decide upon admitting to the register every man who has effected a policy on his own life for the natural period, with some registered insurance company, to the amount of £100, and who has paid three annual premiums thereon. The annual premium payable by a person aged thirty at the date of insurance is not more than £2, 2s. without profits, and £2, 10s. with participation. This would still leave room for saving, at least if we are to suppose that a large number of persons have been able to deposit upwards of £60 in the

banks. And here let us remark that it is a very unfair thing to decry the value of the savings' banks qualification on the ground that in certain places there are but few depositors. It was, we are convinced, the honest intention of the Government to encourage thrift by introducing this qualification into their bill, and we confidently expect that the immediate result will be a vast increase in the amount of deposits. Let the Government grant the same boon to insurers which they have offered to depositors, and afford this further facility for attaining a vote to the careful and industrious artisan.

One very important provision, which appears to us to have received far less attention than it deserves in the discussions which have taken place upon the bill, is the reduction of the qualification for proprietors under every kind of tenure, from £10 to £5 value. This, it must be acknowledged, is a most liberal concession, which proves beyond a doubt that the Ministry have been most sincere in their wish and endeavour to extend property qualification as far as that can be done compatible with safety to the constitution.

We have already said that we shall not pronounce a decided opinion upon the points of difference between Ministers and their late colleagues; but we must frankly state that there appear to us to be serious practical objections in the way of that uniformity of franchise in county and borough which it is sought by this bill to establish. We do not attach much value to the fact that, from time immemorial, there has been a wide difference in the franchises. Practically, all that we have to consider is the status, character, and capacity of the persons who will be admitted to the register, should the county qualification for occupants be lowered from £50 to £10. If they are persons who can be safely trusted with the franchise, and who will exercise it independently, let them by all means have it. But if they do not answer that description, then we protest against their admission for the mere sake of promoting uniformity. We cannot confess to an overweening love for uniformity in

VOL. LXXXV.-NO. DXXII.

things political, for we have always regarded it as another name for redtapeism in its strictest form. We do not, however, denounce it as a thing to be avoided when circumstances combine in its favour, but we have

not been able to convince ourselves that such is the case in the present instance. We set aside the argument that this part of the ministerial measure is an approach to electoral districts. We care nothing for fancied resemblances; all we are bound to consider is the practical effect of such a measure. Now it must be admitted that this is a question of real difficulty. It seems hard to deny to the occupant of a £10 house beyond the limits of a borough, that privilege which is accorded to another man, who, paying no higher rent, resides within the borough ; but if you admit such house - tenants to the county franchise, you must likewise admit all agricultural tenants holding the same value, and we certainly are not prepared to say that such an addition would be desirable. We have never been backward in our advocacy of the agricultural interest, and we have often had occasion to expose and condemn the silly and malignant sneers at the incapacity of the British farmer, which emanated from the conceited agitators of the towns; but we are not disposed to allow that so vast a change as this would be advantageous. We do not doubt that a considerable number of the mass of £10 tenants may be fitted for the franchise, but we have as little doubt that others are unfitted, both in respect of intelligence and independence. At any rate the transition is too rapid. We presume that the Ministry have been mainly induced to insert this clause by the consideration that a majority of the House of Commons voted for the second reading of Mr Locke King's bill. It should, however, be remembered that the division took place under peculiar circumstances, and both Mr Sydney Herbert and Lord Palmerston assert that the £10 franchise for counties has never yet been affirmed by the House. The noble Lord expressed himself thus in the debate: "Those who quote the last bill, which was read a second time,

2 L