HC Deb 13 March 1843 vol 67 cc765-76

On the Order of the Day being moved for going into committee on this Bill,

Mr. Liddell

asked the right hon. Baronet, the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if he were prepared to give any public assurance, that some provision would be introduced into this bill against the personation of voters? The further consideration of his (Mr. Liddell's) bill stood for Wednesday next; and in the event of the right hon. Baronet being so prepared, he would postpone that bill sine die.

Sir J. Graham

said, that since the question was last under discussion, he had given his attention to the subject, and had framed some clauses to prevent the personation of voters. These had been seen by his hon. Friend, who had deemed them satisfactory, and well adapted to effect the purpose which his hon. Friend and the House were desirous of securing. They would be ready for publication to-morrow, and he would move their insertion into the bill on the bringing up of the report.

Mr. Hume

thought, that the amendments which had been made in the bill only tended to increase and complicate its machinery. They never could have an adequate number of voters, so long as men were liable to be punished for the conscientious exercise of the franchise. This bill would leave the system open to all the complaints which were now urged against it, and which, in his opinion, must continue to be urged against it, until the system of vote by ballot were substituted.

House in Committee.

On the third clause (providing that the clerk of the peace was to issue his precepts with the form of notice, &c, to the overseers of the poor),

Mr. Christie

suggested, that there should be more frequent registrations, in order to prevent the necessity of persons, who had become qualified waiting such a length of time before they could obtain the franchise. If, for instance, a man became qualified on the 1st of August, he could not, under this bill, be put upon the register until the end of October, in the ensuing year, a period of about fifteen months. He thought there ought to be appointed a certain number of registration judges, who would confine themselves to the business of registration; or, in the event of the County Courts Bill being introduced, that the judges under that bill, who would go round the country five or six times a-year, and hold courts in different parts of the country, should be required to add to their county court duties those of registration.

Sir J. Graham

thought it would be better not to discuss points before they arrived at them in the bill. It had been his desire, in the framing of this bill to depart as little as possible from the provisions of the Reform Act, and only to do so where experience had shown that such departure was indispensable and certain to effect some public good. But he totally differed from those Gentlemen who imagined, that registrations more frequent than annual, would effect any public good. He, on the contrary, felt convinced, that a constant recurrence of the turmoil which attended registrations would be the cause of much public evil and inconvenience, and ought to be avoided. It was proposed by the bill brought in by the late Government, that certain officers should be constantly employed throughout the year making circuits in various parts of the kingdom for the purposes of registration; but if this were to be the case, the turmoil would never subside.

Mr. Elphinstone

thought it would be more convenient that the precepts should be issued in the first instance to the clerks of the unions than to the overseers of the poor.

Sir J. Graham

could not agree with the hon. Gentleman. The clerks of the unions did not possess the requisite knowledge for discharging the duty consequent upon the service of the precepts, while overseers, from their great parochial knowledge, could at once secure the most competent persons. The hon. Gentleman's suggestion would, besides, impose a new duty on a party not now conversant with it, whereas it was a duty quite germane to the general duties of an overseer.

Clause agreed to.

On clause 4 being proposed,

Sir E. T. Colebrooke

begged to call the attention of the right hon. Baronet to an objection which presented itself on this clause. He alluded to the necessity which was imposed upon voters who changed their residence, even though they retained the same qualification, to re-establish their claim to vote. He asked whether this might not be altered.

Sir J. Graham

thought that no practical difficulty arose upon that part of the clause to which the hon. Baronet alluded.

Clause agreed to.

On clause 5 (overseers to prepare list of claimants and objections),

Mr. T. Duncombe

said, that he thought there was a material point in which this clause was defective. He thought that the overseers should append to the name of every person objected to the cause of such objection. He believed that, in many cases, objections were raised for party purposes merely, and upon no real or sufficient grounds, and that, if such a proposition as that which he made were agreed to, much vexation and expense would be spared.

Sir J. Graham

while he concurred in the object of the hon. Member, thought that every means had been taken in this bill against the bringing forward of frivolous objections. He thought, too, that the hon. Member had raised this objection rather prematurely, because it could hardly be said, he thought, that the practices of which the hon. Members complained prevailed with overseers. Their objections were, in the great majority of cases, valid and tenable objections. As the hon. gentleman, however, had raised this point generally with respect to party objections, he begged to refer him to the 45th clause of the bill, whereby power was given to the revising barristers to give costs in the case of frivolous claims or objections. There was also this inconvenience in requiring the specific statement of the ground of every objection—that every possible objection whcih the utmost legal ingenuity could raise would be brought forward.

Mr. T. Duncombe

felt that the last observation of the right hon. Baronet would apply to persons making objections merely for the purpose of harassing the voters. The overseers, however, could hardly be supposed to be persons who would make frivolous or vexatious objections. There was no reason, therefore, why they, at all events, should not state the grounds of their objection. The same rule should be adopted in cases of objections by the agents of the parties, for the purpose of bringing them more clearly within the 45th clause.

Mr. Cripps

as a revising barrister of ten years' experience, could bear testimony to the carefulness of overseers in avoiding frivolous objections. He believed that to impose upon them this additional duty would be to throw them into great difficulties.

Mr. T. Duncombe

said, he would propose that in the eleventh line, after the word "objected," the words "and with the bona fide ground of objection" be inserted.

The Solicitor-General

observed, that it often happened that the overseer was an illiterate man, and they would involve him in all kinds of difficulty by calling upon him to specify the grounds of objection.

Mr. Escott

said, after what had fallen from the hon. and learned the Solicitor-general, he should not vote for the amendment.

The committee divided Jon the question that the words: proposed by Mr. T. Dun combe be inserted:—Ayes 47; Noes 57: Majority 10.

List of the AYES.
Aldam, W. Hatton, Capt. V.
Barnard, E. G. Hay, Sir A. L.
Bernal, R. Humphery, Mr. Ald.
Bowring, Dr. Hutt, W.
Brotherton, J. Langston, J. H.
Burroughes, H. N. Lawson, A.
Busfeild, W. Mitchell, T. A.
Butler, hon. Col. Morris, D.
Cayley, E. S. Morison, Gen.
Chetwode, Sir J. Norreys, Sir D, J.
Christie, W. D. O'Brien, J.
Colbrooke, Sir T. E. O'Brien, W. S.
Collett, W. R. O'Conor, Don
Denistoun, J. Ogle, S. C. H.
Duncan, Visct. Palmer, G.
Ellis, W. Scholefield, J.
Elphinstone, H. Smith, B.
Evans, W. Strickland, Sir G.
Gibson, T. M. Strutt, E.
Hall, Sir B. Tancred, H. W.
Thornely, T. Worsley, Lord
Tufnel, H. Yorke, H. R.
Vivian, J.H. TELLERS.
Williams, W. Hume, J.
Wood, G. W. Duncombe, T.
List of the NOES.
Acland, T. D. Hodgson, R.
Arbuthnott, hon. H. Hope, hon. C.
Arkwright, G. Hughes, W. B.
Baring, hon. W. B. Hussey, T.
Bentinck, Lord G. Irton, S.
Blackstone, W. S. Jermyn, Earl
Blakemore, R. Kemble, H.
Boldero, H.G. Knight, H.G.
Botfield, B. Lincoln, Earl of
Clive, hon. R. H. Mackenzie, W. F.
Cripps, W. Masterman, J.
Darby, G. Meynell, Capt.
Davies, D. A. S. Plumptre, J. P.
Dickinson, F.H. Pollock, Sir F.
Egerton, W. T. Praed, W. T.
Escott, B. Richards, R.
Fitzroy, Capt. Round, J.
Fitzroy, hon. H. Rous, hon. Capt.
Follett, Sir W. W. Rushbrooke, Col.
Forbes, W. Sibthorpe, Col.
Gaskell, J. Milnes Sutton, hon. H. M.
Gordon, hon. Capt. Tennent, J. E.
Gore, W. O. Tollemache, J.
Gore, W. R. O. Trench, Sir F.
Goulburn, rt. hn. H. Wilbraham, hon. R.
Graham, rt. hn. Sir J. Wood, Col. T.
Hampden, R. Young, J.
Hardy, J. TELLERS.
Henley, J. W. Fremantle, Sir T.
Hepburn, Sir T. B. Pringle, A.

Clause to stand part of the bill.

On clause 7, any person on the list of voters may object to any other person named in the list or not entitled to be on it.

Mr. Tufnell

objected to that part of the clause which made it sufficient for notices of objection to be sent by post, and moved, as an amendment, that in every case where an objection was made, the overseers should be bound to see that the notice was actually served upon the party objected to.

Mr. Henley

suggested that the latter part of the clause, which enacted that notices sent by post should be sufficient, should be omitted altogether, and the matter be left to be settled in the interpretation clause.

Sir J. Graham

said, it was intended that a personal notice should be served on the tenant in every practical case.

The Attorney-General

said, that the serving of notices by post, on the most important matters, was considered sufficient in courts of law, and he thought it would be found to answer every purpose in reference to the service of notices.

The committee divided on the question that the words proposed by Mr. Tufnel inserted: —Ayes 38; Noes 91:—Majority 53.

List of the AYES.
Aldam, W. James, W.
Barnard, E. G. Mitchell, T. A.
Bernal, R. Morris, D.
Bowring, Dr. Norreys, Sir D. J.
Brotherton, J. Ogle, S. C. H.
Busfeild, W. Parker, J.
Cayley, E. S. Protheroe, E.
Christie, W. D. Scholefield, J.
Colbrooke, Sir T. E. Stuart, W. V.
Collett, W. R. Strickland, Sir G.
Crawford, W. Strutt, E.
Duncan, Visct. Tancred, H. W.
Elphinstone, H. Thornely, T.
Evans, W. Villiers, hon. C.
Forster, M. Walker R.
Gibson, T. M. Williams, W.
Hall, Sir B. Yorke, H. R.
Hatton, Capt. V.
Hay, Sir A. L. TELLERS.
Hindley, C. Cowper, hon. W. F.
Hume, J. Tufnel, H.
List of the NOES.
Acland, T. D. Goulburn, rt. hon. H
Ainsworth, P. Graham, rt. hn. Sir
Arbuthnott, hon. H. Greenall, P.
Arkwright, G. Grogan, E.
Baring, hon. W. B. Hale, R. B.
Baring, rt. hn. F. T. Halford, H.
Bentinck, Lord G. Hampden, R.
Blakemore, R. Hardinge, rt. hn. Sir H
Boldero, H. G. Hardy, J.
Botfield, B. Henley, J. W.
Broadley, H. Hepburne, Sir T. B
Bruce, Lord E. Hodgson, R.
Burroughes, H. N. Holmes, hon. W. A'C.
Cavendish, hon. G. H. Hope, hon. C.
Chetwode, Sir J. Hope, G.W.
Clive, hon. R. H. Hornby, J.
Compton, H. C. Hughes, W. B.
Cripps, W. Hussey, T.
Darby, G. Hutt, W.
Davies, D. A. S. Irton, S.
Denison, E. B. Jermyn, Earl
Dugdale, W. S. Kemble, H.
Egerton, W. T. Knight, H. G.
Egerton, Sir P. Langston, J. H.
Escott, B. Lawson, A.
Ferrand, W. B. Lincoln, Earl of
Fitzmaurice. hon. W. Mackenzie, W. F.
Fitzroy, Capt. Martin, C. W.
Fitzroy, hon. H. Morgan, O.
Flower, Sir J. Newdigate, C. N.
Follett, Sir W. W. Newry, Visct.
Forbes, W. Nicholl, rt. hn. J.
Gaskell, J. Milnes Northland, Visct.
Gordon, hon. Capt. Palmer, G.
Gore, W. O. Peel, rt. hn. Sir R.
Peel, J. Seymour, Lord
Plumptre, J. P. Sibthorp, Col.
Pollhill, F. Sutton, hon. H. M.
Pollock, Sir F. Tollemache, J.
Praed, W. T. Trench, Sir F. W.
Pringle, A. Wilbraham, hon. R. B.
Pusey, P. Wood, Col. T.
Richards, R. Wood, G. W.
Rose, rt. hn. Sir G. Young, J.
Round, J. TELLERS.
Rous, hon. Capt. Fremantle, Sir T,
Rushbrooke, Col. Baring, H.

Clause agreed to.

The clause, with verbal amendments, was agreed to.

On clause 11, the overseers to give public notice as to the necessity of the payment of rates and taxes before the 20th day of June.

Mr. Elphinstone

objected to the rate-paying clauses altogether, of which this was a part. They caused a great deal of expense to the candidates, and were a great source of bribery. In the city of Westminster the expense, he believed, of paying the rates of persons unable to pay them, was not less than 600l. Requiring rates did not, as was supposed, ensure a more respectable class of voters, but gave rise to a great deal of bribery, in order to secure the votes of the smaller voters. He should propose that the clause be omitted.

Mr. Fitzroy

thought, that the period of twelve calendar months for which a man was required to have paid all his rales was too long. It involved a virtual disfranchisement for fifteen months, as the rates were never immediately paid.

Sir James Graham

explained, that the words "twelve calendar months," in the clause, had been introduced in order to settle a doubt which had been raised by the revising barristers. Some of them had required proofs that the rates had been all paid up for a longer period than twelve months, for all the time, in fact, that a man had been liable for the rates, and this part of the clause was, in fact, a relaxation of what they had interpreted the law to be. With respect to the observation of the hon. Member for Lewes (Mr. Elphinstone), he must observe, that the house-tax having been abolished, a considerable relaxation of the principle of the Reform Bill had already taken place, and this clause, as he had explained, was a still further relaxation of the law, as interpreted by the revising barristers. He must remind the House, as he had before stated, that when the Reform Bill was passed, the authors of that bill would have proposed a higher rate of qualification than 10l; were it not that the franchise they did propose was accompanied by the restriction of paying rates. They thought that the payment of rates was a test of the respectability and solvency of the parties, and had that condition been refused, the authors of the Reform Bill would not have been satisfied with a franchise so low as 10l. In practice, however, a considerable relaxation of that restriction had already taken place; and, as he was disposed to adhere to the principles of the Reform Bill, he could not for one moment admit the proposition of the hon. Member, and would divide the committee against him.

Mr. Brotherton

would support the hon. Member for Lewes, because the rate-paying clauses narrowed the franchise and promoted bribery. It was generally understood, when the Reform Bill was passed, that it was intended to enfranchise all the owners and occupiers of premises of 10l; value. But it was found in practice that the Reform Bill did not enfranchise all the 10l. householders, and the disfranchisement was caused by the rate-paying clauses. In his own borough the number of persons who at any time voted was very much below the number of persons who occupied 10l. premises. On these grounds he should vote against the clause.

Mr. Hume

objected, when the Reform Bill was under discussion, to the rate-paying clauses. He had then stated, from the experience of Westminster, that those clauses would cause a great deal of bribery, and what he had foretold had come to pass. The payment of rates had led to a great deal of bribery. They had tended also to narrow the franchise, as he had objected to them when the bill was under discussion. At present there was not 1,000,000 of voters, though there were 5,000,000 of full grown males who ought to have the franchise. At present five out of six of the full grown males, who bore all the burdens of the state—who paid the taxes, and were called on to perform all the duties of subjects to the crown—were denied the franchise. He thought every male of twenty-one years of age should have a vote; but those who were not prepared to go so far as he went, should at least be ready to remove this restriction. If they withdrew the tax-paying clauses they would both lessen bribery and practically extend the franchise. He was reluctant to oppose this clause, as it was an amelioration of the present law; but if there were no better mode of getting rid of the rate-paying clauses he would oppose it. At the present time, when distress was disfranchising the people, and when great dissatisfaction existed amongst them on account of being disfranchised, he thought it would be proper to abolish the rate-paying clauses.

Mr. Escott

did not find it his duty to defend the principles of the Reform Bill, but he must remind the House that to insist on the payment of rates was not an innovation introduced by the measure. Under the old franchise the scot and lot voters were obliged to pay the rates. It had, however, been slated by the right hon. Baronet, that a higher rate of qualification would have been selected had the payment of rates not been adopted. If therefore, they were to abolish the rate-paying clauses, they must raise the qualification. He wished to see both sides keep to their bargain.

Mr. Hume

had never agreed to rate-paying clauses, and, therefore, he was no party to any bargain.

Mr. Ewart

said, the hon. Member for Lewes (Mr. Elphinstone) had shown that these clauses narrowed the franchise and promoted bribery. Those two objections, pointing out the moral evils caused by these clauses, had been left entirely unanswered. Was it worth while to retain such clauses, on the supposition that they insured the respectability of the voters? He thought it was not, and he should support the hon. Member for Lewes.

The Committee divided on the question that the clause stand part of the bill:— Ayes 118; Noes 58; Majority 60.

List of the AYES.
Acland, T. D. Compton, H. C.
Arkwright, G. Corry, rt. hon. H.
Baring, hon. W.B. Cripps, W.
Baring, rt. hon. F. T. Darby, G.
Beresford, M. Davies, D. A. S.
Blakemore, R. Denison, E. B.
Boldero, H. G. Dickinson, F. H.
Botfield, B. Douglas, J. D. S.
Broadley, H. Dowdeswell, W.
Broadwood, H. Dugdale, W. S.
Bruce, Lord E. Duncombe, hon, O.
Burroughes, H. N. Eastnor, Visct.
Chetwode, Sir J. Egerton, W. T.
Christopher, R. A. Egerton, Sir P.
Chute, W. L. W. Escott, B.
Clive, hon. R. H. Farnham, E. B.
Collett, W. R. Ferrand, W. B.
Fitzmaurice, hon. W. Martin, C.W.
Fitzroy, Capt. Marton, G.
Fitzroy, hon. H. Master, T. W. C.
Flower, Sir J. Masterman, J.
Follett, Sir W. W. Maunsell, T. P.
Forbes, W. Mildmay, H. St. J.
Fox, S. L. Miles, P. W.S.
Gaskell, J. Milnes Morgan, O.
Gladstone, rt. hn. W. E. Newdigate, C. N.
Gordon, hon. Capt. Newry, Visct.
Gore, M. Nicholl, rt. hon. J.
Gore, W.O. Northland, Visct.
Graham, rt. hn. Sir J. Pakington, J. S.
Greenall, P. Palmer, G.
Grey, right hon. Sir G. Peel, rt. hon. Sir R.
Grogan, E. Peel, J.
Hale, R. B. Pennant, hon. Col.
Halford, H. Philips, G.R.
Hampden, R Plumptre, J. P.
Hardinge, rt. hn. Sir H Polhill, F.
Hardy, J. Pollock, Sir F.
Henley, J. W. Praed, W. T.
Hepburn, Sir T. B. Pringle, A.
Hodgson, R Pusey, P.
Holmes, hon. W. A. Richards, It.
Hope, hon. C. Round, J.
Hope, G. W. Rous, hon. Capt.
Hornby, J. Rushbrooke, Col.
Hughes, W. B. Seymour, Lord
Hussey, T. Sibthorp, Col.
Irton, S. Smollett, A.
Jermyn, Earl Somerset, Lord G.
Johnstone, H. Sutton, hon. H. M.
Jolliffe, Sir W.G.H. Tollemache, J.
Kemble, H Trench, Sir F. W.
Knight, H. G. Turnor, C.
Lawson, A. Welby, G. E.
Lemon, Sir C. Wilbraham, hn. R. B.
Lincoln, Earl of Wood, Col. T.
Lockhart, W. Young, J.
Lygon, hon. Gen.
Mackenzie, W. F. TELLERS.
Mackinnon, W.A. Baring, H.
Mahon, Visct. Fremantle, Sir T.
List of the NOES.
Ainsworth, P. Gibson, T. M.
Aldam, W. Hall, Sir B.
Bannerman, A. Hastie, A.
Barnard, E. G. Hatton, Capt. V.
Bernal, R. Hay, Sir A. L.
Blewitt, R J. Heathcoat, J.
Bowring, Dr. Hindley, C.
Brotherton, J. Hume, J.
Busfeild, W. Humphery, Ald.
Cavendish, hon. G. H Hutt, W.
Cayley, E. S. James, W.
Christie, W. D. Johnston, A.
Colborne, hn. W. N. R Langston, J.H
Colebrooke, Sir T. E. Mitchell, T. A.
Crawford, W.S. Morris, D.
Dalrymple, Capt. Norreys, Sir D. J.
Duncan, Visct. O'Brien, W. S.
Duncan, G. Ogle, S. C. H.
Ellis, W. Parker, J.
Evans, W. Philips, M.
Forster, M. Plumridge, Capt.
Scholefield, J. Wakley, T.
Stansfield, W. R. C. Walker, R
Stuart, W. V. Williams, W.
Stock, Mr. Serj. Wilshere, W.
Strickland, Sir G. Winnington, Sir T. E.
Strutt, E. Yorke, H. R.
Tancred, H. W.
Thornely, T. TELLERS.
Tufnell, H. Elphinstone, H.
Villiers, hon. C. Ewart, W.

Clause to stand part of the bill.

On clause 45, which empowers revising barristers to grant costs, to the amount of 20s., against frivolous claimants or objectors, being put,

Mr. Charles Wood

thought it of too much importance to allow it to pass without remark. In its general principle he agreed. It was as objectionable that bad votes should be retained on the register, as that good votes should be struck off; but Gentlemen practically versed with the subject had led him to believe that the practice of revising barristers being allowed to award costs, would throw very serious difficulties in the way of making up correct registers. It was to the probable practical effects, not the principle of the clause, that he was opposed. He thought that if those who lodged an objection should be compelled to deposit some such sum as 5s. that the precaution would be quite sufficient for the prevention of frivolous objections.

Colonel Sibthorp

thought that, instead of no costs being permitted, much larger sums should be awarded as such. He would move, as an amendment, that the utmost amount of costs to be allowed should be 10l; instead of 20s.

Mr. Christopher

believed, from communications which he had had with the revising barristers, that if they had a power of awarding costs, many frivolous cases would never have been entered into. He would move, as an amendment, that 5l; instead of 20s., be the limit of costs, a proposition to which he hoped that the Committee would agree.

Mr. Charles Wood

stated that he was principally opposed to costs being awarded against claimants. He would move that the words "claim or," in the clause be omitted, with the view of limiting the power of revising barristers in granting costs in cases of objection.

Sir James Graham

said, that he was in favour of granting costs against both frivolous claimants and objectors. The registration commissioners had come to the conclusion, after a long investigation, that costs should be so allowed by the revising barrister. He quite objected to the motion of the hon. Member for Halifax, and did not see the justice of his distinction between frivolous claimants and objectors of the same class.

Mr. Charles Wood

withdrew his motion.

Colonel Sibthorp

also withdrew his motion, but hoped that the Government would consider its principle.

Sir James Graham

said, with respect to the matter before the House, that when a bill of this nature was first brought in by the late Government, costs were proposed to be allowed to the extent of 10l., but within two years the amount was reduced to 10s., and, of the two propositions, he certainly liked the latter best. He thought that the power of awarding costs to the amount of 10l; would prove a serious bar to the claims of many persons to be registered; and that, upon the whole, costs not exceeding 20s. would be sufficient to answer the purpose they were designed to serve.

Mr. Turner

would divide the Commit tee against the proposition with respect to costs. He thought that a greater sum than 20s. should be permitted to be awarded.

Mr. Brotherton

thought that 20s. were sufficient.

Mr. Christopher

would divide the Committee upon his proposition of substituting 5l; for 20s. in the clause.

The Committee divided—the question being put as follows, Forty-fifth Clause (Power to Barrister to give costs in certain cases to parties claiming or objecting), p. 19, 1. 14:—Provided that the sum so or dered to be paid by way of costs shall not in any case exceed the sum of:—

Proposed to fill the blank with "twenty shillings;" afterwards proposed to fill the blank with "five pounds;" subsequently, proposed to fill the blank with "three pounds:"—Question put, "That the blank be filled with 'twentv shillings:'"—Ayes 154; Noes 34; Majority 120.

List of the AYES.
Acland, T. D. Bateson, R.
Adare, Visct. Beckett, W.
Aldam, W. Bentinck, Lord G.
Antrobus, E. Bernard, Visct.
Archdall, Capt. Blake, Sir V.
Baring, hon. W. B. Boldero, H. G.
Baring, rt. hon. F. T. Botfield, B.
Bramston, T. W. Hutt, W.
Brotherton, J. Jermyn, Earl
Bruce, Lord E. Johnstone, Sir J.
Buller, Sir J. Y. Langston, J. H
Busfeild, W. Lemon, Sir C.
Campbell, Sir H. Lincoln, Earl of
Cavendish, hon. G.H. Lockhart, W.
Childers, J. W. Lygon, hn. Gen.
Cholmondeley, hn. H Mackenzie, W. F.
Chute, W, L. W. McGeachy, F. A.
Clay, Sir W. Manners, Lord C. S.
Clive, E. B. Marjoribanks, S.
Corry, rt. hon. H. Martin, C. W.
Cowper, hon. W. F. Master, T. W. C
Crawford, W. S. Masterman, J.
Dalrymple, Capt. Maxwell, hon. J. P.
Damer, hon. Col. Meynell, Capt.
Darby, G. Mildmay, H. St. J.
Denison. E. B. Miles, T. W. S.
Dickinson. F.H Mitchell, T. A.
Disraeli, B. Morgan, O.
Douglas, Sir C. E. Morris, D.
Duke, Sir J. Napier, Sir C.
Duncan, Visct. Newdigate, C. N.
Duncombe, hn. A. Nicholl, rt. hn. J.
Duncombe, hn. O. Norreys, Lord
Dundas, Admiral Norreys, Sir D. J.
Eastnor, Visct. Northland, Visct.
Egerton, W. T. O'Brien, W. S.
Eliot, Lord Patten, J. W.
Elphinstone, H. Peel, rt. hn. Sir R.
Escott, B. Peel, J.
Estcourt, T. G. B. Pennant, hn. Col.
Evans, W. Philips, G. It.
Farnham, E. B. Philips, M.
Fitzmaurice, hn. W. Plumptre, J. P.
Flower, Sir J. Pollock, Sir F.
Follett, Sir W. W. Ponsonby, hn. J. G.
Forster, M. Pringle, A.
Fuller, A. E. Protheroe, E.
Gaskell, J. Milnes Repton, G. W. J.
Gill, T. Ricardo, J. L.
Gladstone, rt. hn. W. E. Rose rt. hn. Sir G.
Gordon, hn. Capt. Round, J.
Gore, M. Rushbrooke, Col.
Goulboum, rt. hn. H. Russell, Lord J.
Graham, rt. hn. Sir J. Seymour, Lord
Grey, rt. hn. Sir G. Smythe, hn. G.
Grogan, E. Somerset, Lord G.
Grosvenor, Lord R. Stanley, Lord
Hall, Sir B. Stansfield, W. R. C.
Hamilton, W. J. Stanton, W. H.
Hamilton, Lord C. Strutt, E.
Hardinge, rt. hn. Sir H. Sutton, hn. H. M.
Hardy, J. Taylor, T. E.
Hastie, A. Tennent, J. E.
Heathcote, G. J. Thornley, T.
Henley, J. W. Tollemache, J.
Herbert hn. S. Towneley, J.
Hodgson, R Trench, Sir F. W.
Hollond, R. Tufnell, H.
Holmes, hn. W. A'C. Wakley, T.
Hope, A. Wallace, R
Hope, G. W. Walsh, Sir J. B.
Horsman, E. Wellesley, Lord C.
Howard, hn. C. W. G. Wilbraham, hn. R. B.
Hughes, W. B. Wilshere, W.
Wood, C. Young, J.
Wood, Col. T. TELLERS.
Wood, G. W. Fremantle, Sir T.
Wortley, hn. J. S. Baring, H.
List of the NOES.
Acton, Col. Hill, Lord M.
Ark wright, G. Hornby, J.
Blackstone, W. S. Irton, S.
Broadley, H Mainwaring, T.
Broad wood, H Manners, Lord J,
Chetwode, Sir J. Mundy, E. M.
Christie, W. D. Neeld, J.
Collett, W. R Neville, Ralph
Compton, H. C, Newry, Visct.
Cripps, W. Ogle, S. C. H
Davies, D. A. S. Packe, C. W.
Duncombe, T. Plumridge, Capt.
Ebrington, Visct. Ross, D. R
Ferrand, W. B. Smollett, A.
Fitzroy, hn. H. Turner, E.
Forbes, W.
Fox, C. R. TELLERS.
Glynne, Sir S. R. Christopher, R. A.
Gore, W. R. O. Sibthorpe, Col.

Clauses up to 48 agreed to.

House resumed.

Committee to sit again.