PARLIAMENTARY ELECTORS BILL. (Hansard, 14 July 1847)

§ SIR DE L. EVANS
moved the Second Reading of the Parliamentary Electors Bill. He thought the payment of rates, as affecting the vote of the elector, ought to be regulated by the same principle in towns as in counties; and characterized the working of the Reform Bill in this respect as absurd and unjust. In many parishes there was but one rate made in the year, and in others one in six months, in three months, or in some cases once a month; the law as it stood was, therefore, not equally applicable to all these different practices. The Bill was so moderate, that he must say hon. Gentlemen who would oppose so mild and moderate a proposition, would also restore again the days of Old Sarum and Gatton. He was anxious again to see in the next Parliament the agreeable countenances of hon. Gentlemen opposite, and he, therefore, thought they had better support this Bill, as it would give rise to disagreeable questioning on the hustings if they did not. An hon. and eloquent Gentleman not then present had drawn very nice distinctions between liberal professions and popular principles; but this Bill, he would contend, was really liberal, and he was equally certain that it would be popular. The object was to give six additional months for the payment of rates.

§ MR. NEWDEGATE
said, the gallant Officer had disclaimed being a party to an understanding which existed in that House. The hon. and gallant Gentleman was not present, and therefore he perhaps had a right to repudiate. But, at the same time, the understanding did exist and had been acted on. Instead of moving that the Bill be read that day three months, they had on that occasion merely divided as to its postponement with a view to its being withdrawn; but when he saw that the gallant Officer named an early day, he (Mr. 315 Newdegate) regretted that division had not been on the merits of the Bill. His object, however, in rising was to call the attention of the House to the circumstances under which this Bill was introduced. A Bill connected with the registration of voters, had been introduced two months before by his hon. Friend the Member for Midhurst (Mr. Walpole), and it was read a second time without a division. They were then told that it was too late to proceed with that Bill, as it would-open the whole question of the franchise immediately before a general election. Her Majesty's Ministers proved that they were in earnest in making this objection, by withdrawing a Bill of their own of a similar character to that now pressed by the hon. Member for Westminster. These, he thought, were valid objections to any legislation on that subject at that time; and they applied with equal force to the Bill now proposed to be read a second time. It might or it might not be desirable to repeal the ratepaying clauses of the Reform Bill; but if there was any period at which it would be unfair to do that, it was immediately before a general election. [Mr. WAKLEY: The Bill would not apply at the ensuing general election.] He saw no reason, then, why the Bill should not be deferred until a future Session. He objected to proceed one stage with the measure, because its passing into a law would have no immediate results; and he thought it very unfair that it should now be brought forward merely for the purpose of raising an election cry. His own opinion as to the franchise was, that it should be held sacred; and in this Bill the principle of the franchise was invaded. The necessity of having paid the taxes as a condition was one of the principles on which the franchise rested; and any attempt to alter it now from any desire of a temporary popularity was unworthy of the House. He trusted after what had passed the Government would lend no hand to any such proceeding, The House had divided on the subject, and had decided that this measure should not be pressed. What good could result from pressing this Bill now? The Government were pledged to bring in a measure on the subject next Session; and such a measure was best in the hands of responsible parties. The hon. and gallant Member had stigmatised the 101. occupancy as absurd, and said that it was still more absurd to insist on the payment of rates and taxes. There were but two principles on which the right to 316 vote were based—that of value, and that of having paid the taxes—and if the hon. Gentleman objected to both these, he was at a loss to conceive on what principle he would place the franchise. [Sir DE L. EVANS: Household suffrage.] The natural termination of such an attempt would, if successful, be universal suffrage; and he should therefore oppose it still more strongly. It was true that the Bill only contained one clause; but it contained a principle on which might be founded an alteration of the present system. In short, after the decision of the House, that it would not open this grave question at that period of the Session; after the Gentlemen on his side of the House had withdrawn a Bill on this subject on that account, which had passed its second reading, and had been approved by a Committee; after the Government had also sanctioned the policy of not interfering with this question, so near the dissolution, by withdrawing their own Bill; after they had been told by the hon. and gallant Gentleman that its intended effect was to get up an election cry very unfairly, he trusted the House would agree with him and throw out the Bill.

§ SIR W. CLAY
supported the Bill. The ancient system of voting consisted in possessing the franchise by occupation and the payment of taxes; but he defied any one to say, that before the passing of the Reform Bill, the one was conjoined with the other. He supported the Bill, not because it accomplished all he wished, but because it would take away an unfair restriction. The hon. Gentleman said, that the Bill was brought forward as an election claptrap. It was by no means an unwise step, at the end of a Parliament, to show the people of this country who were their friends, and who were opposed to their liberties. The hon. Gentleman (Mr. Disraeli) who used the expression "popular principles and liberal principles" was more noted for mooting difficult political problems than for answering them. It was far easier to ask questions than to answer them; but he thought it was a distinction without a difference. No principle, in his opinion, could be popular without being liberal, and every liberal principle would sooner or later be popular.

§ MR. WAKLEY
supported the Bill, as he considered that it would enfranchise an immense body of properly qualified persons. The hon. Gentleman the Member for Warwickshire (Mr. Newdegate) was no doubt a just man and a friend of the peo- 317 ple, for he had voted for the Ten Hours Bill, and had on many occasions shown towards large classes of the community a kindly disposition. He believed the hon. Gentleman to be a strictly just man; but he had got a crochet on this subject, which it was to be hoped he would soon get rid of. The Reform Bill was very liberal to voters who obtained that right by descent, by marriage, or by gift; it said nothing about rates on any particular day; and why should there be such an odious distinction between them and other classes, who as householders had a right to the privilege? Why should there be this anomalous distinction between county and borough voters? He wished to see the ratepaying clauses of the Reform Bill repealed, because if a man did not pay his rates he was answerable to the law, and his goods might be distrained upon; and surely this was an unfair restriction to continue when they had such a power. He did not object to annual Parliaments, because "short reckonings made long friends;" and the character of the House would be elevated by more frequent communion with those who sent them there. When a Member was about to meet his constituents, it was astonishing what attention he paid to questions which his constituents were likely to discuss with him at the hustings. Under the present law many persons of property were disfranchised. The Governor of the Bank had his vote disallowed on one occasion, because he had not paid his rates by a certain day. He trusted the opposition would be withdrawn, and that the Bill would be carried.

§ MR. CRIPPS
hoped, that if the hon. Member for Finsbury (Mr. Wakley) brought in a Bill for annual Parliaments, he would also propose that the office of county coroner, which was one of considerable emolument, should also be made an annual appointment. [Mr. WAKLEY was ready to resign that office whenever he was called upon.] The hon. Gentleman had argued that there should be no distinction between county voters and town voters; but the two cases were not in the slightest degree analogous. There was as much difference between them, as between a voter for an East India Company's director, and for a county coroner. A person might be an elector for a county without being liable to pay a tax of any kind whatever, while the borough voter rested his privilege solely on the amount of rates and taxes he paid. He thought the three months mentioned 318 in the Reform Bill, which was merely an allowance of time to the voter, was quite sufficient. When he heard the speeches of hon. Members on former occasions on this subject, he thought that vast numbers of the constituencies were disfranchised; but he was surprised when he examined the return moved for by the hon. Gentleman opposite to find that there were a mere nothing, something like 20,000 in the whole of the country; and it was well known that a large proportion of every constituency voluntarily allowed themselves to be disfranchised by that clause, in order to avoid the trouble of voting, and the risk of disobliging friends. He moved that the Bill be read that day six months.

§ SIR B. HALL
believed that the number of electors would be doubled in Marylebone if the ratepaying clauses were abolished. He was decidedly in favour of the Bill, as it gave the electors a greater margin as to time; indeed, its only fault was that it did not go far enough. He hoped the gallant Officer would take the sense of the House upon it,

§ MR. HENLEY
opposed the measure. He thought this matter should be left as settled by the Reform Bill, when the Liberal party had the stick in their own hands. He also disapproved of the Bill, because it held out an inducement to the poor to run into arrears with respect to rates and taxes. No friend of the poor would encourage anything so detrimental to their interests.

§ CAPTAIN PECHELL
remarked, that the parish officer would always take care that the poor owed as little rates as possible, and that this matter would not have been left unsettled by the Reform Bill, if a certain Field Marshal in another place had not designated the principle now proposed as another step towards universal suffrage, and declared that it was calculated to upset our glorious Constitution.

§ MR. SPEAKER
declared himself with the Ayes.

List of the AYES.
Aglionby, H. A.	Borthwick, P.
Aldam, W.	Bouverie, hon. E. P.
Arundel and Surrey, Earl of	Bowring, Dr.
	Brotherton, J.

Brown, W.	Jervis, Sir J.
Buller, C.	M'Carthy, A.
Buller, E.	Martin, J.
Clay, Sir W.	Mitchell, T. A.
Colebrooke, Sir T. E.	Monahan, J. H.
Collett, J.	Ogle, S. C. H.
Denison, W. J.	Osborne, R.
D'Eyncourt, rt. hn. C. T.	Parker, J.
Divett, E.	Pechell, Capt.
Duncan, G.	Perfect, R.
Duncombe, T. S.	Philips, M.
Dundas, Sir D.	Pinney, W.
Ebrington, Visct.	Rich, H.
Ellis, W.	Sheil, rt. hon. R. L.
Escott, B.	Somerville, Sir W. M.
Gibson, rt. hon. T. M.	Strutt, rt. hon. E.
Gore, hon. R.	Thornely, T.
Gower, hon. F. L.	Wakley, T.
Grosvenor, Lord R.	Ward, H. G.
Hawes, B.	Williams, W.
Hill, Lord M.	Yorke, H. R.
Hindley, C.	TELLERS.
Humphery, Ald.	Eyans, Sir De L.
Hutt, W.	Hall, Sir B.

List of the NOES.
Archdall, Capt. M.	Hamilton, Lord C.
Austen, Col.	Henley, J. W.
Barrington, Visct.	Hotham, Lord
Bateson, T.	Houldsworth, T.
Beckett, W.	Jermyn, Earl
Blackstone, W. S.	Jones, Capt.
Blakemore, R.	Kelly, Sir F.
Boldero, H. G.	Lefroy, A.
Botfield, B.	Lindsay, Col.
Bowles, Adm.	Mackinnon, W. A.
Broadley, H.	Mahon, Visct.
Carew, W. H. P.	Manners, Lord J.
Clive, hon. R. H.	Miles, W.
Codrington, Sir W.	Mundy, E. M.
Denison, E. B.	Neeld, J.
Douglas, Sir C. E.	Neville, R.
Duckworth, Sir J. T. B.	Palmer, R.
Du Pre, C. G.	Palmer, G.
East, Sir J. B.	Patten, J. W.
Egerton, W. T.	Prime, R.
Farnham, E. B.	Reid, Col.
Fuller, A. E.	Repton, G. W. J.
Gardner, J. D.	Round, J.
Gaskell, J. M.	Trotter, J.
Goring, C.	Waddington, H. S.
Greene, T.	TELLERS.
Hamilton, J. H.	Cripps, W.
Hamilton, G. A.	Newdegate, C. N.