SECOND READING. (Hansard, 1 July 1878)

§ EARL STANHOPE
, in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said, that the chief object of the measure was to provide one simple system for the revision of electoral lists for Parliamentary and municipal purposes. In 1876 there were before the other House of Parliament three Bills relating to those subjects; but in 1877 those three Bills were sent to a Select Committee of that House. The Select Committee was composed of 21 Members, of whom two were Metropolitan Members, three Members for great cities, 11 Members for provincial great towns, one county Member, and four Irish Members. He might at once mention that the Bill before their Lordships did not affect Ireland. The Bill contained 43 clauses, and when it came into operation, the revision for both the Parliamentary and the municipal franchises would be carried out by the Revising Barrister. At present the municipal list was annually revised by the Mayor of the city or borough, assisted by two assessors; while the Parliamentary list had to be revised by a member of the Bar appointed to that office. The Bill proposed to do away with the present mode of registering the municipal voters, and provided that the Revising Barrister should revise each at a Court held within the city or borough in the month of October in each year. It had undergone careful consideration in the House of Commons, and came up to their Lordships with the approval of that House. Petitions in its favour had been presented by the Association of Municipal Corporations; and in communications received from Town Clerks, it was estimated that the saving resulting from the operation of the Bill would be very large. It was estimated that in Liverpool the saving would be at least £300, in Manchester £600, and in Birmingham £800. In Liverpool at present the making of the burgees roll cost £353 14s. 9d.; the printing of the same, £464 14s. 6d.; and the printing of the Parliamentary register, £273 6s. 3d.; 485 making a total of £1,091 15s. 6d. The noble Earl concluded by moving the second reading of the Bill.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR
said, the Bill was one of considerable importance, and one which, he hoped, if it became law, would prove extremely useful in its operations. It therefore deserved the favourable consideration of their Lordships, and he hoped it would be read a second time without opposition, as it came before them after having been subjected to the examination of two Select Committees of the other House of Parliament in two successive Sessions, on the last occasion the Committee being assisted by a Law Officer of the Crown. Those Committees had made several very important suggestions, which had been embodied in the Bill by the Law Officer of the Crown. There might be some difference of opinion in their Lordships' House upon some matters of detail; but if it were read a second time they would have ample opportunity in Committee of making any Amendments of detail which might be thought desirable.

§ EARL GRANVILLE
said, that no doubt it was desirable the Bill should pass; but he would remind their Lordships, if he remembered rightly, that when a similar Bill was before their Lordships five years ago, the noble and learned Lord did not express so favourable an opinion upon it.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR
If the noble Earl will take the trouble to compare the two Bills—the Bill of five years ago with the present Bill—he willscarcely say that they are similar.