tive principle of Mr. Bright and the radicals, had also found favour with Mr. Henley, Mr. Walpole, Sir Roundell Palmer, and a certain section of the Conservatives; and could not be opposed by the Whigs, without an open breach with advanced reformers. On the other hand, it was qualified by a two years' residence, by the personal payment of rates, by voting papers, by education and tax-paying franchises, and by dual voting. These securities, as they were called, against a democratic franchise, commended the measure to the Conservative party; but their futility had been apparent to the seceding ministers, and was soon to be proved by their successive rejection or abandonment. The measure embraced proposals calculated to please all parties; and ministers were prepared to assent to any amendments by which its ultimate character should be determined by the form. majority. The results may be briefly Its ultimate told. Household suffrage in boroughs was maintained, with one year's residence instead of two; the county franchise was reduced to 12l.; a lodger franchise was added; the higher class franchises, the dual votes, and voting papers disappeared from the bill; and the disqualification of large numbers of compound householders was averted. The scheme for the redistribution of seats was also enlarged. Every provision which had reconciled Conservatives to the measure was struck out: every amendment urged by the liberal party was grafted upon the bill. And thus the House of Commons found itself assenting, inch by inch, to an extended scheme of reform, which neither Conserva tives nor Whigs wholly approved. Parties had been played off against one another, until a measure which gratified none but advanced reformers,-probably not more than a sixth of the House of Commons, was accepted, as a necessity, by all. Hyde Park, While the bill was under discussion in the House Meeting in of Commons, the public excitement gave May 6, 1867. an impulse to the Liberal party, in passing every amendment favourable to extended franchises. And one remarkable episode illustrated at once the strength of popular sentiment, and the impotence of the executive Government to resist it. A great demonstration in favour of reform was announced to take place on the 6th May, in Hyde Park, when Mr. Walpole, the Home Secretary, not profiting by his sore experience of the previous year, issued a proclamation, stating that the use of the park for the holding of such meeting was not permitted, and warning and admonishing all persons to refrain from attending it. But, in spite of this proclamation, the meeting was held, and large assemblages of people occupied the park, without disorder or disturbance. The right of the Government to prohibit the meeting was contested not only by Mr. Beales and the Reform League, but by Mr. Bright and many other members of the Liberal party. On the other hand, the conduct of the Government in first prohibiting the meeting, and then allowing it to take place, in defiance of their authority, was censured as bringing the executive into contempt. In deference to the strong opinions expressed upon this subject, Mr. Walpole resigned the seals of the Home Department, but retained his seat in the Cabinet. tory state of Meanwhile, the state of the law in reference to the use of the parks for public meetings was Unsatisfac so unsatisfactory, that the Government had the law. brought in a bill to prohibit, under the penalties of a misdemeanour, the holding of any meeting in the royal parks, without the consent of the crown. This bill being violently opposed, was overtaken by the close of the session, and abandoned; and the law has still been left uncertain, and incapable of enforcement. It cannot be questioned that the meetings of 1866, and 1867, should either have been allowed, or effectually prevented. The latter course could only be taken at the risk of bloody collisions with the people; and accordingly such meetings have since been permitted, and have signally failed as popular demonstrations. upon the Reform Bill. In the House of Lords, several amendments were made to the Reform Bill; but the only Proceedings one of importance agreed to by the Com- in the Lords mons was a clause of Lord Cairns, providing, with a view to the representation of minorities, that in places returning three members, no elector should vote for more than two candidates. and The scheme of enfranchisement, however, was not yet complete. The settlement of the bound- Boundaries aries of boroughs and the divisions of coun- of boroughs ties was referred to a commission, and the consideration of the reform bills for Scotland and Ireland was postponed until the next session. counties. Resignation of Earl of Derby. Before these measures were introduced, in 1868, the Earl of Derby was obliged by ill-health to retire, and was succeeded as Premier by Mr. Disraeli Mr. Disraeli, to whose extraordinary tact, Premier. judgment, and address the passing of the English Reform Act was acknowledged to be due. Many difficult questions remained to be settled, which needed the exercise of all his abilities. The Scotch Reform Act, The Scotch Reform Bill, founded generally upon 1868. the same principles as the English bill, proposed an increase of seven members to represent Scotland. This provision contemplated an addition to the number of the House of Commons, which was resisted; and justice to the claims of Scotland was eventually met by the disfranchisement of seven English boroughs having less than 5,000 inhabitants; and in this form the bill for the representation of Scotland was passed. The Irish Reform Act, The Reform Bill for Ireland left the county franchise unaltered, reduced the borough fran1868. chise, and proposed a partial redistribution of seats, which was shortly abandoned. The measure, avowedly incomplete, and unequal to the English and Scotch schemes, was nevertheless assented to, as at least a present settlement of a question beset with exceptional difficulties. Boundaries The boundaries of the English boroughs and the new divisions of counties were still to be of boroughs settled; and, after an inquiry by a select committee, the boundaries, as defined by and counties. the commissioners, were, with several modifications, agreed to. Petitions Practices The series of measures affecting the electoral system was not even yet concluded. A Election measure was, after long discussions, agreed and Corrupt to, for transferring the cherished jurisdie- Act, 1869. tion of the Commons, in matters of election, to judges of the superior courts, and for amending the laws in restraint of corrupt practices. And, lastly, a bill was passed to facilitate the registration of the year, so as to insure the election of a Parliament during the autumn, by the new electors. tional im these mea These measures for extending the representation of the people were little less important Constituthan the great Reform Acts of 1832. The portance of new franchises embraced large numbers of sures. the working classes, and greatly enlarged the basis of electoral power. At the same time, a certain counterpoise to household suffrage was found in the addition of twenty-five members to the English counties, which their population fully justified, and the withdrawal of thirty-three members from English boroughs. Considering how this great constitutional change had been accomplished, not by the deliberate judgment of statesmen, but by the force of circumstances, its results were, not unnaturally, viewed with grave misgivings. The Earl of Derby himself had said, 'No doubt we are making a great experiment, and taking a leap in the dark;" and many thoughtful men believed the state to be approaching the very verge of democracy. Nor can there be any reasonable doubt that the popular element of the August 6th 1867; upon the question 'that this bill do pass.' |