HC Deb 27 May 1881 vol 261 cc1524-35

RESOLUTION.

MR. BLENNERHASSETT ,

in rising to call attention to the importance, in view of probable changes in the electoral franchise and the distribution of political power, of full and accurate information with respect to the relative advantages of various systems of election including proportional representation, the cumulative vote, and the restricted vote; and to move— That a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into and report upon the system of election of Members of this House best calculated to secure the just and complete representation of the whole electoral body. said, it was impossible to exaggerate the serious nature of the change which was impending, and which would bring upon the register a larger number of electors than had been enfranchised by any previous Reform Bill. Before embarking upon a change so great, it was of the first importance that the fullest possible information should be obtained, in order that the change might be made in a way which should produce the maximum amount of advantage and the minimum of danger that might attend it. He was most anxious that the House of Commons should reflect the mind of the country; but, in order that it should do so, the utmost care should be taken so to organize the electoral body as that it should not remain inaccurate, misleading, and unjust, owing to the present extremely anomalous distribution of electoral power. At the last General Election, 181,000 electors failed to return a single Member, while 785,000 electors returned no fewer than six Representatives to Parliament. It was a fact that, taking many important electoral divisions, a majority of electors were represented by a minority of Members, the result in all such cases being to stultify the opinion of the majority of electors. It ought not, therefore, to be overlooked that, under the existing system, a large majority of the electors might be excluded from direct representation in that House. They were, no doubt, told, in answer to that grievance when it was put forward, that if the complainants were not directly represented in their own constituencies they were indirectly represented in other constituencies. That argument had, however, he thought, been sufficiently exploded during the debate on the Reform Bill of 1832. They had now no guarantee that the majority of Members in the House represented the opinion of the majority of the electors of the country. At the last General Election no fewer that 70 Liberal seats and 48 Conservative seats were won or saved by majorities not exceeding 1 in 20. Slight changes in the feeling of the country might thus lead to disproportionate changes in the composition of the House of Commons, and a small section of weak-minded persons in the constituencies might bring the political life of the country into a dangerous and unsettled condition. Besides, it should be re- membered that in the case of what might be called an equilibrium of opinion, where a small number of electors could influence au election, the inducement to corruption was always greatest. The question was, whether they could not preserve all the advantages of representative government, and yet free themselves from the disadvantages which he had pointed out. The Act of 1867 admitted the principle of the representation of minorities, and another and very important recognition of that principle was to be found in the Act relating to School Board elections; but the question was, whether the existing system could not, as he believed it could, be improved. He believed it was possible to give to every Member, both of a minority and a majority, representation in Parliament by the proportional system, as advocated by Mr. Hare. He believed the plan of proportional representation to be the true solution of the problem of representative government. His Resolution, however, did not pledge the House to that opinion; it simply asked for inquiry into the system, in order to find out what was best; his case, as regarded proportional representation, was that it was worthy of careful inquiry and consideration. It was impossible to speak of proportional representation without mentioning the name of Mr. Hare, to whom it owed its origin. He was indebted to Mr. Hare for extracts from unpublished letters of eminent public men which were addressed to Mr. Hare on the publication of his work. [The hon. Member proceeded to read strong expressions of opinion in favour of the scheme from Mr. J. S. Mill, M. Prévost Paradel, and Professor Cairnes. The last-named remarked that it disposed of bribery without any additional machinery.] As to the objection that the plan was new and unfamiliar, the answer was that it was neither mysterious nor complicated, and that it was easy to understand and to practice. The best description of it was to be found in the words of Mr. Mill in proposing the clauses which he endeavoured to insert in the Reform Bill of 1867. There was nothing more in it than that votes were to be received in every locality for other than local candidates; an elector would be allowed to bestow his vote on anyone, and he would naturally vote for the person who would represent him best. If a sufficient number of persons fixed their choice on anyone, he would be elected; and the number of votes sufficient to elect a candidate would depend upon the proportion of the total number of Members to the total number of the whole constituency. Taking certain figures, the number of votes necessary to elect a candidate in this way would be 3,000, and when that number of votes had been put to the credit of a candidate, those whose votes had not been counted would not lose them if they had put down the name of a second candidate, to whom they were to be given if not required by the first. In that way an elector might vote alternatively for a first, a second, or a third candidate. This plan would prevent the throwing away of votes, and it would give no trouble to any but the scrutineers; while, as a matter of fact, their work would be simpler than many operations of daily occurrence. He refrained from entering into questions a detail, which could be better examined in Committee. The answer to those who said the plan was unworkable was that it had been working well many years. It had been adopted in the elections of Denmark for the last 20 or 30 years; and Lord Lytton, when he was Ambassador at Copenhagen, gave a clear account of the simplicity with which the plan was worked. It had been successfully tried in an election in London within the last few days. The effect of its adoption in Parliamentary Elections would be to make the House of Commons a truer reflection of the mind of the people, a truer image of the feelings of the nation. Every voter might have a due share of political power, and no one need be nominally represented by a candidate against whom he had voted. Under the system which he recommended power would be given to educated and enlightened minorities to elect men to represent them, and the House of Commons would become the representative of the national intelligence. No sudden and violent changes would take place in the House not corresponding with changes outside. What were the objections which were urged against the system? One objection was that it would destroy the local character of our representative institutions. He contended that no such effect would follow. On the contrary, while the electoral system was made more elastic, local attachments would remain as strong as ever. Another objection was that crotchets and interests would increase, and legislation on the broad principle of the general good would be interfered with. Now, he thought that crotchets ought to be represented if a certain number believed in them. He sincerely believed the only real objection and difficulty in the system was its unfamiliarity to the public mind. But that ought not to influence them. At the last General Election a peculiar form of electoral machinery originated at Birmingham, and shortly after that election the President of the Board of Trade wrote a letter to The Times newspaper that, whether for good or evil, the organization had taken firm root in the country, and politicians would do well to give it in future unprejudiced attention. He cordially admired the energy and skill by which his right hon. Friend and those who worked with him had attained results so eminently satisfactory. He contrasted this with the secret caucus system in America, by which the franchise was so manipulated before the voter went to the poll that there was no such thing as the exercise of free suffrage. He entertained no doubt that such a system as this would be eminently distasteful to the President of the Board of Trade, for, in his address to tile National Liberal Federation in Leeds in 1879, he insisted that every section of the Party should be represented, and that none should suffer from exclusion. That was the strongest argument in favour of minorities. He claimed the support of all who honestly and sincerely held the Democratic theory of government. He hoped he had said enough to convince the House that there were grave and serious considerations involved in this matter, considerations which did not appeal to political passion or partizan zeal, but to the calm judgment of thoughtful men, who looked to the future, as well as the present. They had now an interval of political calm; no one could say how long that calm might last; but what he desired was that it should be used in collecting information upon this subject. There were many reasons why the Government should not refuse the Committee for which he asked. Those who believed in the system believed in it so strongly and with such entire conviction that the question could not possibly be suppressed. Some felt so strongly on the subject that, anxious as they were to support Liberal progress in every direction, they would find it utterly impossible without this inquiry to support any proposal for electoral reforms, and would feel it their duty to give their most strenuous opposition to any measure for the extension of the franchise if they had not full information on the subject. This was no class or Party question. It was in the interest of all classes, and in accordance with the principles of both Parties; the question was how they could get the most perfect safeguards at once against Democratic passion and oligarchical re-action. He begged to move the Resolution of which he had given Notice.

MR. A. ELLIOT

said, that a great many on that side of the House hoped that the great question of County Reform would be dealt with next Session, and if that were so, they should not delay to make inquiries into the subject now before them. In supporting the Resolution he did not wish it to be supposed that in all respects he agreed with his hon. Friend the Member for Kerry (Mr. Blennerhassett). His desire was, before Party passion and individual prejudice became excited, in view of another General Election, to look as deeply as they could into the different methods by which true representation was to be provided. The House of Commons was now on its trial; it was not the only great debating place in the country—discussions were held outside as well as inside that House. For their own credit they ought to take care that their character as a Parliament, where great measures were to be discussed, should be kept up by making the House truly representative of the nation. They had heard from Mr. Mill and Mr. Lowe equally gloomy anticipations of the terrible evils of a monotonous electorate, and how monotony would reign in that House. He denied that there was one uniform way of thinking in the present House of Commons, or that variety did not exist. By a proper re-distribution of seats, and an increase in the system of one-membered seats—the plan always favoured by Mr. Cobden—if any strong opinions were held in the country, Members would be found in that House to repre- sent them. It was supposed that there was little chance of a minority being unrepresented in that House; but there was a chance of it. Let them take the case of Scotland. While he rejoiced that in Scotland the Liberals were so strong, he must say, as a Liberal, that Scotland would not be so well represented if Scotch Conservatives were shut out from that House. The House would be less representative, and no good would be done to the country at large. They must remember that under the next Reform Bill the increased county electorate would necessitate, if they were to regard numbers at all, a large increase of County Representatives. Without discussing all the various systems that had been proposed, he would only express his preference for small or moderate-sized constituencies, each electing one Member. What he desired was that a constituency should have some knowledge of its Members, which was, of course, impossible if the number of voters was very large. As things were, the constituencies had the power of electing Members, but were, in most cases, practically unable to select candidates. To his mind, it was one of the main objections to the celebrated system of Mr. Hare that it would tend to prevent the expression of local feeling. At the same time, the plan might be tried in a modified form, in Lancashire, for instance, where large minorities were, in more than one case, virtually unrepresented. The changes that were, in his opinion, most urgent, were such as would increase the elector's power of choice, and would secure the proper representation of local feeling and interests. He was glad to second the Resolution of his hon. Friend.

Amendment proposed, To leave out from the word "That" to the end of the Question, in order to add the words "a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into and report upon the system of election of Members of this House best calculated to secure the just and complete representation of the whole electoral body,"—(Mr. Blennerhassett,) —instead thereof.

Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question."

MR. ARTHUR ARNOLD

observed, that the speech of the hon. Member for Kerry was substantially a recommenda- tion of Mr. Hare's system of voting, the objections to which were, perhaps, more obvious than its advantages. He saw no reason for referring the question to a Select Committee, though he admitted that some of the principles enunciated by the hon. Member would probably improve our present scheme of representation. It was a matter which might rather be referred to the electors of the country to consider for themselves. It would probably happen on the occasion of every General Election that they would have one man elected the supreme Representative of the country. There were several important questions which would be brought before the people of the country at no distant date—the liberation of the Church, the liberation of the land, in which he was more intimately interested, and possibly the liberation of Parliament from control by the other House of the Legislature. It was therefore important that every means should be used for insuring the most effective representation of the people of this country. With regard to the manner in which minorities were represented in three-cornered constituencies, he could not say that he was an admirer of the system. Suppose his hon. Friend the Member for Carnarvonshire (Mr. Rathbone), at the time when he was the minority Member for Liverpool, had been nominated one of the Ministers of the country, it would have been utterly impossible for him to seek re-election, as it would now be for a Conservative in Manchester. He could not vote for the proposal of his hon. Friend the Member for Kerry, for while he thought the subject was one of great importance which the people ought to investigate for themselves, he did not believe it could be usefully considered at the present time by a Committee of the House of Commons.

MR. RATHBONE

said, he was surprised to hear a Radical Member like the hon. Member for Salford (Mr. Arthur Arnold), who, he thought, did believe in principles, state that what was just and right was not expedient. He (Mr. Rathbone) was not prepared to say whether Hare's system of representation was the best form of minority representation or not; but he was prepared very cordially to support a Motion for examination into what would be the best system of insuring the representation of minorities in the very great ex- tension which they were bound to give to the representation of the Democratic part of the community. When he first advocated the system of the representation of minorities, he had not the slightest expectation of being a Member of that House, and also at that time he believed that the extension of the franchise in Liverpool would have given entire power to the Liberal Party. So it would have done if it had not so happened that the first election for Liverpool was on the Irish question of the Disestablishment of the Church, which raised the very strong feeling which exists in Lancashire of an anti-Irish and somewhat anti-national character. He advocated that system, because, believing it was necessary that every part of the community should be represented, it seemed to him that there was a strength and a weakness in every kind of Government which they had yet seen. An aristocratic Government was apt to be somewhat narrow and oppressive, though having its own virtues; and certainly a Government confined to the middle classes, as they saw it in Louis Philippe's time in France, was narrow and mean, though it also had very great advantages; while a solely Democratic Government would be apt to be swayed by great tides of public opinion, and, therefore, not be sufficiently stable. What they really wanted was a Government which should represent the strength of every section. The second ground on which he thought a representation of minorities was very important was, that while believing, as he did, that the instincts of the people were good and right, yet he did believe it was necessary, especially in a Democratic constituency, that a number of men should be kept before it, and, as leaders of that constituency, should be so independent that they would be able, when there was a great wane of public opinion in one direction, to keep before the community, from an independent, a prominent position, the other side of the question. Even on our very imperfect form of minority system Mr. Cobden would have continued to represent the West Riding; the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, Manchester; and the Prime Minister, South West Lancashire. He believed that would have a most beneficial effect on the country, and would not have been without its advantages on those distinguished men themselves, for he considered it very important that those who led the Government should represent large constituencies. Such representation brought them in contact with very different sections of the community, and it had a tendency to steady a politician and prevent him from running into extremes. Minority representation gave a man a very great advantage in taking a bold course against particular sections of the community. The hon. Member for Salford (Mr. Arthur Arnold) had said that if a man represented a minority be could not take Office; but that difficulty would be removed if they could only throw away the absurd old system which required a new election when a Minister took Office, and which enabled a small constituency to reverse the determination of the nation. He was now no longer a minority Member, and could speak without any personal interest. What a monstrous thing he said it would be if, in a constituency of 60,000 electors, where 5 per cent would turn the scale either way, that the minority, which with a slight wave of public opinion might become the majority, should for the term of years be absolutely unrepresented. They might say that the minority of Conservatives in the towns would be represented by the Conservatives in the country, and vice versâ; but he pointed out that the Liberal Members for the counties represented a different shade of opinion from the Liberal Representatives in the towns.

MR. ASHTON DILKE

said, he thought the attitude assumed by the Liberal Members who had joined in this discussion justified the course taken by the hon. Member for Kerry (Mr. Blennerhassett) in bringing forward this Motion. It was curious to notice the differences of opinion on the subject in the present Ministry. The President of the Board of Trade and the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster were strong supporters of the absolute representation of the majority. On the other hand, the Postmaster General and the Under Secretary of State for the Home Department advocated a totally different system. The Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs was also much interested in the question of the best way to secure the representation of minorities. It was a strange fact that the late Conservative Government had been returned to power by a minority of electors. The inade- quate representation of Scotch Conservatives had been referred to; but there was a more striking instance in England. The English Catholics had not been able to return a single Member in the House of Commons. He thought this Committee was needed more for the Government than for independent Members. Two statements had been lately made by the Prime Minister which he thought justified the case of the hon. Member for Kerry. The one was, that the Government staked its existence on the Irish Land Bill; and with this ought to be compared the statement of the noble Earl the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, that the present Parliament would not be dissolved until it had dealt with the question of county representation, for which it had been elected; he hoped that was so; and the other was, that the late Conservative Ministry had had a perfectly Constitutional right to act as they had done, just like the present Ministry, though the former only represented a minority of the nation. This Committee, if appointed, would do useful work in dealing with other important points, such as the residential franchise—the assimilation of the county to the borough franchise, and the different kinds of voting—for even in Parliamentary Elections there were two kinds, the minority vote being one; and there were different systems in Parliamentary, municipal, and school board voting—all these were questions of the greatest interest; and he hoped the Government would accept the Resolution of the hon. Member for Kerry.

MR. BIGGAR

said, that the hon. Member for Kerry advocated what was known as the Hare system. The Resolution was, at all events, an innocent one, and would simply involve a Committee of Inquiry, a great mass of evidence, and the publication of Blue Books which nobody would read. He had himself practical experience of the tyranny of a majority in municipal matters, where the majority absolutely overrode the minority, and incurred heavy liabilities which bore equally on the minority with the majority. He should oppose the scheme of the hon. Member for Kerry, for the reason that it would favour, as he believed, wire-pulling on the part of the Leaders of one of the two political Parties.

SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT

said, that though the discussion had been of a very interesting and instructive nature it could not be denied that the speech of his hon. Friend, with which it opened, was more of an academical than of a practical character. He could only say that it had never before been the custom of the House of Commons to refer matters of this kind to Select Committees—indeed, he remembered the saying of a very distinguished statesman, that he would never submit the Constitution of this country to a Select Committee. Any alterations of the laws of this country ought to be based on a deliberate expression of opinion of the country, and not upon the Report of a Select Committee. If a Committee were appointed, what practical result would follow? It could only be very much a reproduction of the debate of to-night. There would be a very ingenious speech in favour of the Hare system, and ingenious speeches in favour of other systems; and he saw no possibility of arriving at any practical result. For his own part, he was one of the old-fashioned school, and he had never been able to bring himself to admire the notion of turning the electoral system of England into a sort of Chinese puzzle, or selecting Members of Parliament by a sort of double acrostic. That might be a very ingenious occupation for people who had nothing to do; but it would greatly puzzle and confuse the great mass of the electors. He therefore thought it would be more wise for the House to decide at once in reference to the proposal of his hon. Friend, and to proceed with the Business which had been set down for transaction in Committee of Supply.

COLONEL MAKINS

said, he could not support the Resolution in its present form, but would accept one directing a Committee to collect information as to the various systems in operation.

Question put.

The House divided:—Ayes 102; Noes 40: Majority 62.—(Div. List, No. 217.)

Main Question proposed, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair."