§ Order of the Day for consideration of the Commons' Amendments, and Reasons, read.
§ The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNEsaid, in conformity with the notice which he had given, he rose to call their Lordships' attention to the Amendments which had been made in the other House of Parliament in this Bill, which had undergone a very full discussion in this House, the result of which was, that their Lordships had made very material alterations in this Bill. Some of these alterations had been struck out, others had been retained; and with these changes it had been sent up from the other House. He wished generally to call their attention to the different Amendments which had been made in the measure, leaving it to their Lordships to take any one of them in detail, and to found upon it any Motion that might seem desirable. He would shortly state the character of the Amendments which the other House had agreed to, as adopted by their Lordships, and then to those which that House had thought fit to make, but which the other House had not adopted, but had on their side amended, and again submitted for their Lordships' consideration. It was his intention to submit a Motion to the House to agree to these Amendments of the Commons. The Amendments which the other House had agreed to were but few, but they were of some importance. They had agreed to the Amendment suggested by their Lordships, the adoption of which would be attended with the very useful effect of excluding any fraudulent occupiers from the possession of the franchise; and they agreed with that House to regard actual occupancy, either as tenant or owner, as an essential qualification. They had also agreed with another important Amendment which had been adopted by that House unanimously, and which certainly met with his own entire concurrence—to omit the clause by which joint occupiers were to have the right of voting. They had also agreed with the Amendment which inserted certain words in a clause by which a net value was required to qualify a person for voting, so as to prevent the custom of faggot voting, and securing that the person voting should be bonâ fide in possession of the amount of property which was legitimately required. They had also agreed to the Amendment with regard to 852 the alteration of the dates in the Bill. The House of Commons, however, on the consideration of the whole of the subject, dissented from the conclusions their Lordships had come to on two important points. The first was as to the proposed qualification of voters; and the other was, the self-acting principle of registration. The House of Commons, in sending up the Bill, had adopted a certain rate of voting, with which their Lordships did not agree, but required a greatly increased amount of rating of an occupancy. The House of Commons had sent up a Bill with the sum of 8l. rating for a qualification; but, after a great deal of discussion in that House, and after various suggestions had been made, their Lordships were pleased to alter this enactment, and make provision that the occupancy should be rated to the enormous amount of 15l. The Commons had now sent up the measure again amended; and he now entreated that House to reconsider this subject, with the view of coming to an agreement. The sum of 8l. was in the Bill as it was originally sent up, and 15l. was substituted by their Lordships. The House of Commons, anxious to maintain, if possible, a good understanding and agreement between that House and themselves, said that while they could not acquiesce in that large increase in the value to confer the right of voting, they had abstained from sending the Bill back with the amount which they had originally decided upon, and had altered their original proposal, by substituting 12l. for 8l. This change was agreed to by a large majority of the other House, and the adoption of it would have the effect of giving no more than 10 voters for every 100 male adults in the population of Ireland; while in England, Wales, and Scotland, the right of voting, taken on the average, was possessed by 28 out of every 100 male adults; and in Scotland, where the proportion of voters was the lowest, the proportion was 25 to the 100. He could hardly believe that noble Lords were prepared to pass such a sentence on Ireland, as to say that 10 in the 100 of the adult male population of the country was too large a proportion of the population of that country to be entrusted with the elective franchise. If they looked at the recent election for Mayo, they would find a striking instance of the evils of the present system. Such a state of things loudly called for a proportionate increase in the number of voters. He knew that he had 853 been accused of showing too great a willingness to adopt their Lordships' sentiments upon this subject, in not having pressed them to a decision upon the proposition of the House of Commons for an 8l. franchise; and he knew that he might also be accused that night of showing too great pertinacity in asking and urging their Lordships not to adopt so high a rate of qualification as 15l. He was indifferent to both those accusations; but he wished to see a Bill pass which should put an end to this subject, which should not leave a cause for ferment in that country; and which should not exclude any class of persons from the right of voting who were qualified by situation and numbers to exercise that privilege. He was far from asking their Lordships to forego that right, which they unquestionably and constitutionally possessed, of modifying and altering the vote of the other House of Parliament. He was not one of those who would, under any circumstances, wish to see their Lordships reduced to act the part of a mere puppet in the constitution of the country, whose duty it was merely to register in due form the decisions of any other body; but while he thought they had an unquestionable right to exercise their own opinion upon these subjects, and to canvass them in the spirit of free inquiry, he did earnestly conjure their Lordships that that privilege which they respected in themselves, and for themselves, they would liberally concede to others; and if they were satisfied, as he thought they must be, that it was by representative government alone that any part of this united kingdom could remain happy and contented, he did trust that, in regulating the amount of the franchise in Ireland, they would not so contrive it as to leave out of it, and alongside of it, excluded from the margin which they prescribed, any body of occupiers so large and so situated, by nullifying the effects of that franchise by making it not effectually and not really a representation of the opinions of the people of that country. Even if those opinions should not, in their Lordships' apprehension, be always exercised in accordance with the rule of right, yet they should recollect that they were never more sacred than when they were exercised in a constitutional manner, and when the people were not driven to express them in modes which were unconstitutional, and in a course which was attended with danger and mischief to the public safety. He thought he was not asking their Lordships 854 to grant too great a boon in calling upon them to give to Ireland an increased franchise. He asked them to grant it, if not to the same extent as in England and Scotland, at least in a greatly increased proportion to the present constituency. He therefore earnestly recommended the House to agree to this Amendment of the Commons. There was another Amendment which was also the subject of much discussion in that House, fie meant the Amendment by which that House set aside the self-acting principle of registration, and had substituted for it a system of individual claim and application, which could not he made without subjecting the voter to all that interference and dictation which had to an extraordinary degree marked and distinguished the progress of elections in Ireland. The House must be well aware of the authority exercised over the voters in Ireland. There was the authority of the landlord—there was the authority of the priests—and there was the authority of persons who were known by the name of agitators. All these influences, he believed, would be materially diminished if the Bill passed with the alteration made by their Lordships. If, however, persons were called upon to claim the right of voting before they possessed it, it would be found that there were no persons who would exercise the franchise unless under the control of the landlords and the priests. They might depend upon it the adoption of the course proposed by the Commons was that best calculated to give an honest, independent, and intelligent constituency. He trusted their Lordships would reconsider this part of the subject, and adopt the clause as it originally stood, by which the guardians of the poor, and the clerks of the peace, were bound to place duly qualified voters on the register. The other Amendments of the Commons wore not of a character to call for observation from him. The noble Marquess concluded with moving that the Commons' Amendments to the Lords' Amendments be agreed to.
LORD STANLEYhad no intention of reopening at any length the discussion which had already taken place upon the two important Amendments last alluded to by the noble Marquess. He confessed, however, that he had heard with some surprise the statement of the noble Marquess, that the House of Commons had acceded to several material Amendments which had been made by their Lordships in this Bill; and, certainly, when the noble Marquess 855 enumerated them, it did not appear that they were of a very material or important character, when he was obliged to enlist in his enumeration the Amendment with regard to the alterations of the dates, which was rendered absolutely necessary, unless they had intended to make the Bill complete nonsense, because, the Bill reaching that House in July, it was made to come into operation by the House of Commons on the 1st of June; therefore the House of Commons would not have been very consistent if they had opposed the alteration. Then again they were told that they had adopted another Amendment, the obvious intention of which was to make a bonâ fide occupation necessary for the franchise. There was another Amendment of great importance, which had been introduced by the noble Marquess, namely, the getting rid of the joint occupancy qualification; but as this had been carried at the instigation of Her Majesty's Government, no credit should be taken for its adoption elsewhere.
§ The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNENo, you proposed it.
LORD STANLEYhad certainly given notice to that effect, but he had been asked by the noble Marquess across the table why he (Lord Stanley) had put it down on the list of Amendments which he had given notice of proposing, as the noble Marquess intended to move it himself; whereupon he (Lord Stanley) replied that as other Amendments were consequent upon its adoption he had inserted it in his list. One of the Amendments was necessary, as it had direct reference to the joint occupiers. The Committee, therefore, inserted words to give effect to it. But to the two points which were of real importance in the Bill, the Commons had altogether disagreed. The House of Commons had disagreed to the Amendments with reference to the amount of the franchise, and with respect to the clause which related to what had been called the self-acting system of registration which their Lordships had struck out. Their Lordships had had very long discussions on both those subjects, and notwithstanding the resistance of Her Majesty's Ministers, their Lordships had expressed very strong opinions in favour of the Amendments which had been proposed, and had carried them by considerable majorities. On that occasion a noble Friend of his on the cross-bench had expressed a hope that they did not demand either a 12l. or a 15l. franchise, with a wish to make it a ground of compensation 856 or bargain with the House of Commons, hut that they would, to the best of their judgment, agree to the lowest amount of qualification which they could adopt with safety for the working of the Bill, and for the sake of the representative system of both Great Britain and Ireland. So far from thinking the Amendment which be had proposed gave too high a qualification, he was directly of the contrary opinion. So far from thinking that their Lordships, by assenting to a 15l. qualification had gone too far, he was of opinion that it was a dangerously low one. It was not the qualification of the person who was rated and paid on a 15l. holding, but the occupier, however abject his condition, however ignorant, not possessed of any property, who was in possession of a tenement assessed at 15l. a year. This qualification would probably include persons who were in possessed of three or four acres of land, on which they lived, and in the town populations much less. The mere occupancy of a house as a tenant at will, as their Lordships' Amendment stood, would confer on this class of persons the right of voting. The noble Marquess said, and he fully concurred with him, that the representative system should be a bonâ fide representative system, and it was upon that the country rested its welfare and character, and upon which the safety of the constitution depended. But he was anxious that these representatives should be not merely representatives of numbers of interests, but of the intelligence, and property of the country. He believed that they would make the constituencies of Ireland more the exponents of the opinions and interests of that country if they regarded them, not with respect to mere numbers, but to other qualifications; but he feared the Government were making the constituency of Ireland merely representative of numbers, without reference to property, or at all events they were so framing their constituency, that numbers would overbalance that portion which possessed property. This was not a question of principle, but of degree. It had happened, in consequence of the emigration or removal of many, and of the dispensations of Providence, that the constituency of Ireland had become very low. They had been told by the noble Marquess to look at the recent election for the county of Mayo, and to the very small number of voters who had polled there. He (Lord Stanley) would ask the House to refer to what had taken place at that recent election as a specimen of what they might 857 expect if they adopted any such plan as that which now stood in the Bill, It was stated that the number of electors was very small, not exceeding 300—and not more than 230 polled at the last election. He must, however, say that the number which were actually prevented voting—which would be made the subject of inquiry elsewhere—was very considerable, for the most extraordinary steps had been taken to prevent these persons exercising their rights. The election for Mayo was attended with as disgraceful proceedings as had ever taken place, and ought to be a warning to the noble Marquess and his Colleagues. No question of foreign or home policy—no question of protection or free trade—no question involving a difference on English or Irish interests, was involved in it; but the landlords, the owners of the soil in the county, both Whig and Tory, were almost unanimous in favour of one of the candidates; but the election was carried against the landlords by the most unscrupulous, unwarrantable, and unconstitutional intimidation of a portion of the Catholic priests, that ever disgraced a country calling itself civilised. The mode of carrying on the election was a slander and scandal on the representative system. The Gentleman who was returned did not represent the owners and occupiers of that county, but was the representative of Bishop M'Hale and his subordinate clergy. When they saw in the county of Mayo the immense power of the Catholic priests, and the unscrupulous manner in which they exercised that power, their Lordships must be doubly cautious in introducing a new experiment for the franchise, never to adopt such a scheme as was calculated to make the electors the mere tools of the Catholic clergy. This, he repeated, was a question not of principle, but of degree. He, and those who acted with him, admitted that it was desirable to extend the franchise—to extend it as far as could be safely done, namely, with a proper combination of numbers with intelligence and property. The limitation must necessarily be arbitrary. The limitation which he proposed might he acted upon for a period, and if, in due course of experience, they found this 15l. franchise worked well, then would be the time to consider whether they could not safely and advantageously go down to 12l.; but if they fixed it at 12l. now, the House should remember that, however ruinous the constitution of the franchise to be 858 established—however dangerous and anarchical the character of the constituency to be created under it might prove, they could not follow the example set them in a neighbouring county, namely, having granted the franchise, they could not withdraw it, but must continue it. This was a point which should be carefully and deliberately considered by the House. Noble Lords should recollect, if they followed a step for concession it was irretrievable, and therefore there must be great danger in taking that step. The Bill as it stood proposed to grant a franchise infinitely lower than any which now existed in England, Scotland, or even Ireland itself. He did not think the noble Marquess was very correct in his calculation of the proportion of electors in England and Scotland to the adult population. This measure would not give so large a proportion to England and Wales as it gave to Ireland; for a much lower qualification was required to qualify for a vote than in Great Britain. Then, in Mayo, how could they give anything like a probable guess at the number of persons qualified, when compared, as the noble Marquess did, with the electors of England or Scotland? He had that morning referred to a return which bad recently been laid before Parliament, which stated that there were in Mayo 52,000 tenements, each of which, on an average, was occupied by seven or eight inhabitants; and of these tenements 40.000 were estimated as being rated under 5l. The fact was, that the population of Mayo were a population of paupers; and because the persons possessed of property there were small in proportion to the population, the Government argued that, in the creation of a constituency, their Lordships ought to look to numbers only, and not to property at all, and that the representative of Mayo, who was to form an integral part of the representation of the three kingdoms, should be the representative of a population of paupers. For his part, however, be would not, and he could not, accede to a proposition which placed the franchise in Ireland in the hands of a pauper constituency. He believed that it was not safe to go lower than a 15l. franchise; and, notwithstanding there had been a considerable majority of the House of Commons in favour of a 12l. franchise, as he had no doubt there would have been in favour of a still lower franchise, if Her Majesty's Government had proposed it, he trusted that if their Lordships were to exercise an 859 independent judgment at all—if they were to entertain any respect for their own decisions—they would maintain their own opinion, and support the amount of 15l. as the lowest that could safely be adopted. The noble Marquess had said that the House of Commons had made a great concession to their Lordships in allowing 12l. to be substituted for 8l. as the amount at which a person should he rated to give him the franchise. The House of Commons had certainly adopted the advice given to them by Her Majesty's Government; and it must be borne in mind that the noble Marquess, when the Bill was in their Lordships' House, finding that the general feeling was, that an 8l. franchise was much too low, declared his intention to vote against it. When it was about to be proposed that the franchise should be 8l., the noble Marquess interposed and desired that the question should not be put, using the extraordinary expression, that if the question was as to the insertion of 8l., he should vote against an 8l. franchise. He (Lord Stanley) was convinced, therefore, that the noble Marquess, so far from making any concession to the majority against him, was satisfied in his own mind that an 8l. franchise was not safe, and that, in his own deliberate judgment, he preferred a 12l. franchise. The question was not between 8l. and 15l., but between 12l. and 15l.; and the decision of their Lordships was, as he hoped it would be again, that a 15l. franchise was as low as was safe. Perhaps it would be convenient if he were now to say a few words on the other Amendment relating to the subject of compulsory registration. To that system there were two grave objections, and he had not heard either objection answered. In the first place, it was argued that a great number of persons, who wished to avoid altogether the turmoil of an election, and to cultivate their own land in peace and quiet, would be exposed to the solicitations of the landlord on the one hand, and of the priest on the other, from which there was only one mode of escape; and that was, by the occupier not paying his rates. Now, as an Irish landlord, he must be forgiven for saying that there was already a peculiar reluctance on the part of the occupier to the payment of his rates, and that no additional inducement was necessary. Then, again, a system of compulsory registration acted on one side only. It put the occupiers on the register, but left the freeholders, 860 whom, without reference to political party, he might call the conservative interest of Ireland, to make a claim before they could be placed upon it. This, too was proposed at a time when so much apathy prevailed, and when the duty, as it was called, of registering, was so much neglected. He knew that there was some difference of opinion between himself and some noble Lords who were extremely well acquainted with the state of Ireland, as to what would be the practical operation of this part of the measure. Not thinking, however, that the House of Commons had shown any temper or disposition to concede, he could not waive his strong opinion that the system was an objectionable one, for the sake of making a concession to the House of Commons. If the other House of Parliament had fairly and frankly taken the franchise which their Lordships had deemed the lowest which could safely be proposed, he thought it questionable whether it would not have been desirable for their Lordships, acting in a spirit of mutual concession and goodwill, to try, in deference to the opinion of the House of Commons, this new experiment of a system of compulsory registration. If their Lordships, by adhering to their own views, should cause the loss of the Bill for the present Session, much as he desired to see the question settled—much as he desired to see an end put to the repeated discussion and agitation of the measure—though in Ireland, he believed, it caused but little agitation—["Hear, hear!"]—he would rather encounter the inconvenience which attended the renewal of such discussions, and the recurrence of such agitation, than give his assent to a measure which was destructive of the representative system in Ireland. He moved, therefore, that their Lordships do insist on the Amendment made by this House in page 2, line 5.
The MARQUESS of CLANRICARDEthought it was only by enlarging the constituency that a representation of the sense and intelligence of the country could be secured; for the destruction of the 40s. freeholders threw the 10l. householders into the hands of the agitators. The substitution of a 15l. franchise would exclude 48,000 persons from the constituency of Ireland; and as the property thus unrepresented would chiefly belong to the rural gentry, the consequence of adopting 15l. as the qualification would he to throw the representation of the counties into the 861 hands of the shopkeepers in the country towns. The proper system was one which was based on the representation of the mass of the people, The noble Lord who had just spoken referred to the Mayo election in terms which were quite unwarranted. The noble Lord observed that no public principle was involved in the contest. He (the Marquess of Clanricarde) was not there to contradict the noble Lord; but he had seen letters stating in strong terms that votes would be given to the Gentleman returned on grounds involving the question of protection or free trade. He believed that public principles were a great deal canvassed at that election. He protested against the course taken by the noble Lord, in drawing from what might have occurred in a particular case a general conclusion on which to found legislation with reference to the whole of Ireland. The very proceedings which the noble Lord reprobated would not have taken place in an enlarged constituency. With respect to the self-acting registration, the latter proposition had never been brought forward. He was surprised to hear the noble Lord argue, or rather déraisonner, with respect to its probable effects. Instead of producing agitation to coerce electors, the result would be the opposite; for it was manifest that when it was optional for a man to register, his political opinions would be from the first made the subject of inquiry on the part of his landlord, and under such circumstances he was made a party man whether he would or not. The noble Marquess concluded by urging their Lordships to agree to the Amendments of the Commons.
§ The House then divided on Lord Stanley's Motion to insist on the Lords' Amendment:—Content, Present 62; Proxies 53; Total 115: Not Content, Present 56; Proxies 70; Total 126: Majority 11.
863| List of the CONTENTS. | |
| DUKE. | Desart |
| Buckingham | Glengall |
| MARQUESSES | Hardwicke |
| Drogheda | Jersey |
| Ely | Kinnoull |
| Exeter | Longford |
| Salisbury | Lonsdale |
| EARLS. | Lucan |
| Abergavenny | Macclesfield |
| Abingdon | Mansfield |
| Beauchamp | Malmesbury |
| Chesterfield | Mountcashell |
| Cardigan | Nelson |
| Orkney | BARONS. |
| Orford | Abinger |
| Powis | Brougham |
| Romney | Boston |
| Rosse | Clonbrock |
| Roden | Colchester |
| Stanhope | Crofton |
| Sheffield | De Lisle |
| Talbot | De Ros |
| Verulam | Downes |
| Warwick | Forester |
| Wilton | Grantley |
| Winchelsea | Lyndhurst |
| Rayleigh | |
| VISCOUNTS. | Redesdale |
| Gage | Sandys |
| Hill | Skelmersdale |
| Middleton | Southampton |
| Strangford | Stanley |
| Templemore | |
| BISHOP. | Tenterden |
| Bath and Wells | Wynford |
| Proxies. | |
| DUKES. | Ranfurly |
| Athol | Rosslyn |
| Newcastle | Sinclair |
| Manchester | Seafield |
| Marlborough | Sherburne |
| MARQUESSES. | Tankerville |
| Ailsa | VISCOUNTS. |
| Hertford | Beresford |
| Londonderry | Doneraile |
| Waterford | Hawarden |
| EARLS. | Lorton |
| Aylesford | O'Niel |
| Beverley | Sidmouth |
| Buckinghamshire | BISHOPS. |
| Cathcart | Carlisle |
| Caledon | Exeter |
| Crawford | BARONS. |
| Dartmouth | Bexley |
| Dunraven | Bagot |
| Digby | Clinton |
| Delawarr | De Saumarez |
| Eldon | Gray |
| Falmouth | Kilmain |
| Guildford | Middleton |
| Harewood | Polworth |
| Leven | Rodney |
| Northwick | Sondes |
| Onslow | Walsingham |
| Powlett |
| List of the NOT-CONTENTS. | |
| Lord Chancellor | Carlisle |
| DUKES. | Chichester |
| Bedford | Clarendon |
| Buccleuch | Devon |
| Leinster | Durham |
| Norfolk | Effingham |
| MARQUESSES. | Fingall |
| Anglesey | Gosford |
| Breadalbane | Granville |
| Clanricarde | Grey |
| Donegal | Minto |
| Lansdowne | Morley |
| Westminster | St. Germans |
| Winchester | Scarborough |
| EARLS. | Strafford |
| Besborough | Suffolk |
| Bruce | Waldegrave |
| Bathurst | Wicklow |
| Uxbridge | Cremorne |
| VISCOUNTS. | De Tabley |
| Canning | Dufferin |
| Ponsonby | Eddisbury |
| BISHOP. | Elphinstone |
| Norwich | Erskine |
| BARONS. | Foley |
| Ashburton | Milford |
| Beaumont | Monteagle |
| Byron | Overstone |
| Camoys | Portman |
| Carrington | Say and Sele |
| Colborne | Wharncliffe |
| Proxies. | |
| ARCHBISHOP. | VISCOUNTS. |
| Archbishop of York | Bolingbroke |
| DUKES. | Falkland |
| Hamilton | Hardinge |
| Devonshire | Lismore |
| Leeds | Mazarene |
| Somerset | Sidney |
| Sutherland | BISHOPS. |
| MARQUESSES. | Hereford |
| Bristol | Ripon |
| Camden | St. Asaph |
| Normanby | Worcester |
| Northampton | BARONS. |
| Sligo | Blantyre |
| EARLS. | Campbell |
| Charlemont | Cowley |
| Cork | Carew |
| Cottenham | Churchill |
| Craven | Cloncurry |
| Cornwallis | Dacre |
| Derby | Denman |
| Ducie | Godolphin |
| Errol | Heytesbury |
| Essex | Howard de Walden |
| Fitzhardinge | Howden |
| Gainsborough | Keane |
| Haddington | Monson |
| Harrowby | Montfort |
| Home | Rivers |
| Howe | Rossmore |
| Kenmare | Stanley of Alderley |
| Kingston | Stafford |
| Meath | Stourton |
| Oxford | Sudeley |
| Radnor | Suffield |
| Ripon | Vaux |
| Roseberry | Vernon |
| Sefton | Wodehouse |
| Shrewsbury |
§ Amendment not insisted on; and the Commons Amendment agreed to.
The EARL of DESARTthen moved that their Lordships should disagree to that Amendment of the Commons which provided for compulsory registration. He could not consent to expose the voters to the persecution to which they would be sure to he subjected if so pernicious a system were adopted. The Commons had in this matter made a concession to popular clamour, but they had not acted prudently in so doing. Concession never disarmed agitation. It rather infused fresh vigour into it.
LORD STANLEYIf I could bring myself to believe that there is any—the least—likelihood that the result of another division would be that a different conclusion from that which has been just adopted would be arrived at, I most assuredly would not hesitate to advise my noble Friend to divide the House on his Amendment, for I entirely concur with him that the principle of a compulsory registration is liable to many and most serious objections. I believe that it will be found to be most dangerous and mischievous in that country where it is now about to be introduced for the first time—in Ireland; and I am certain that it would be attended with prejudicial results even in England. With these feelings I should not scruple to advise my noble Friend to press his Motion to a division, if I could bring myself to hope that the result of a division would be favourable to our common views; but, so far as I am able to collect the opinions of noble Lords present, there does not appear to be any probability that the numbers would not be pretty much the same as on the last division. On the last division, a majority of your Lordships here present in favour of insisting on your own Amendments was overborne and outbalanced by a majority of proxies, and as, on the principle that litera scripta manet, that same majority still remains to carry the Government to victory—a majority, let me observe, that cannot be influenced by any arguments, however powerful, by any appeals, however eloquent—I feel it would be only a waste of your Lordships' time if we were to proceed to a second division. If the division were to depend on the votes of noble Lords now present, we should have no apprehension of the result; but as the Government will no doubt have again recourse to the proxy system—a system most convenient in itself, and which the present Government has found more convenient than any preceding Government—I must suggest to my noble Friend that it would be a wanton waste of time to divide again. With respect to certain observations which I made some time ago on another division similarly obtained, I must take leave to remak that it is an error to represent me as having stated that it would be desirable to deprive your Lordships of the privilege of voting by proxy. I never said so; but this I did say, and I repeat it, that there never was any Government which has been so much indebted for their majorities as the present Government to 865 that means of voting; and I do not hesitate to assert that, however convenient or necessary it may on some occasions be, it is not a satisfactory mode of proceeding for a Government systematically to pursue, that of reversing the opinions of present majorities by having recourse to the votes of noble Lords who have no opportunity of taking part in the debates.
§ The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNEobserved that he would not say one word to influence the noble Lord from whatever course might appear most desirable to himself. The noble Lord was at liberty to take whatever course he pleased with respect to dividing; but if they went to a division, he (the Marquess of Lansdowne) would most assuredly call for proxies, for nothing could be fairer or more legitimate. The proxy system might or might not be convenient; but of this he was persuaded, that there was no noble Lord in their Lordships' House who would more willingly have recourse to it, if it suited his own purpose, or had more frequently resorted to it, than the noble Lord opposite.
§ The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNEcontinued to observe that if there had ever been a question in which it was fair and legitimate to use proxies, that question was the present one. It was a question which had been before the public for three months, which had been agitated most zealously in that and the other House, and in respect of which it was perfectly well known what the Amendments intended to be proposed would be. If the noble Lord thought that he would gain a single vote by dividing, he would of course divide.
The EARL of DESARTsaid, that he should accede to the recommendation of his noble Friend, and consent to withdraw the Motion. It was with deep regret that he had to assent to the Amendments of the other House. He greatly regretted that their Lordships had ever given their assent to the principle of the Bill, believing, as he did, that the measure was uncalled for and injurious.
§ House adjourned till To-morrow.