HC Deb 18 June 1883 vol 280 cc798-9
MR. WARTON

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether his attention has been called to the speech delivered on the 13th instant at Birmingham by the Right honourable gentleman the President of the Board of Trade, advocating equal electoral districts and payment of Members of Parliament; and, if so, whether the views expressed by that Right honourable gentleman may be taken to indicate the policy of Her Majesty's Government on those subjects.

MR. GLADSTONE

Sir, I do not quite understand the motives which have led the hon. and learned Member to put this Question to me; but I will endeavour to answer it with the gravity which characterized his tone in putting it. My right hon. Friend has, I believe, expressed at Birmingham his own personal opinion as to the question of the payment of Members of Parliament and the formation of electoral districts; but I understand that my right hon. Friend made it quite clear that he did not express the opinion of the Government, and I believe that he even reserved a certain amount of discretion to consider within what limits he should apply his own personal opinion if he had the opportunity. I have not thought it at all necessary to ascertain by a catechism addressed to my Colleagues what their opinions may be upon the subject.

MR. J. LOWTHER

I wish to ask the hon. Gentleman whether he is aware that his Cabinet Colleague, in the speech to which reference has been made, advocated manhood suffrage; and whether the House is to understand, by the answer of the right hon. Gentleman, that the fundamental basis of the Constitution is to be treated by the Government as an open question?

MR. GLADSTONE

Sir, the Question of the hon. and learned Member for Bridport (Mr. Warton) did not call my attention to the subject of manhood suffrage. With regard to "the fundamental basis of the Constitution," the Constitution and its fundamental basis have, within my recollection, been declared by the Party opposite to have been destroyed 10 or 12 times over. If the right hon. Gentleman would be good enough to explain explicitly what he means by the fundamental basis of the Constitution, so that we may know, I shall be happy to answer him; but, until he does, I should be loth to commit myself to an answer on a Question of so grave a character.