into this question of Reform so much of conviction, so much of earnestness, so much of zeal, as has been imparted during the last two years by the leader of the Liberal party. Who is there in the House of Commons who equals him in knowledge of all political questions? who equals him in earnestness? who equals him in eloquence? who equals him in courage and fidelity to his convictions? If these gentlemen who say they will not follow him have any one who is equal, let them show him. If they can point out any statesman who can add dignity and grandeur to the stature of Mr. Gladstone, let them produce him.' Mr. Bright added that it was a deplorable thing that a band of very small men could, at that critical hour, throw themselves athwart the objects of a great party, and mar, it might be, a great measure that ought to affect the interests of the country beneficially for all time.

The House of Commons resumed its discussions on the Reform Bill on the 2nd of May. Meanwhile, the Reform League prepared to hold a great demonstration in Hyde Park. This was forbidden by a proclamation issued from the Home Office; and on the 3rd instant, Mr. Walpole obtained leave to bring in a bill on the subject, providing that any one convening or assisting at such a meeting in any of the Royal parks should, on conviction, be liable to a penalty not exceeding £10, or two months' imprisonment. The Government were subsequently advised, however, that the proposed meeting in Hyde Park was perfectly

VOL. II.

17

legal, and Lord Derby announced that they had no intention of putting it down by force. The demonstration was accordingly held on the 6th, and the people assembled in large numbers. Speeches were made at ten different platforms, and resolutions carried in accordance with the views of the League upon the Reform question. The whole of the proceedings were conducted in the most orderly and exemplary manner. These events led to the retire

ment of Mr. Walpole from the Home Office.

Mr. Bright laboured assiduously to secure such changes in the Government bill as should make it acceptable. Speaking at a meeting in St. James's Hall on the 15th of May, he said that he considered the basis of the borough franchise bad; and that a requirement that all men should pay a certain rate— the poor rate-would inevitably, in the lowest class of voters, afford at least great opportunity for corruption. If the bill passed as it then stood, it would only offer to 245,000 men, in all the boroughs of England and Wales, the elective franchise, on condition that every one of them had resided twelve months in the borough, paid his rate, and taken whatever steps might be necessary to see that his name was left neither off the rate-book nor off the register.

It does not come within our province to follow in detail the course of the intricate and protracted discussions which arose in the House of Commons on the various provisions of the measure. Such vexed questions as that of the compound householder

became enveloped in a cloud of hazy rhetoric, until few could grasp the nature and extent of the amendments proposed. Mr. Bright rose on many occasions -interposing with observations, not set speeches,— always, of course, with the one definite object in view of extending the suffrage and ridding it of those restrictions by which it was entangled in the Government bill. But there was one question discussed, that of voting papers, upon which he expressed himself at length, and we shall therefore pause for a short time over this speech.

By the Government bill it was proposed to permit the vote to be given by voting papers, and not to require personal attendance at the poll. The Opposition objected to this proposal on the ground that it would afford opportunity for fraud, and for practices inconsistent with freedom of election. In the end the proposition of the Government was rejected. Mr. Bright said that the arguments used during the debate should end, after this wide extension of the suffrage, in establishing vote by ballot. As to the question immediately before the House, it was contrary to the interests of the country, and opposed to the purity and reality of the electoral system, that they should give inducements to obtain votes in counties where people did not reside, for the purpose of interfering with the real and honest representation of the residents of a county. The committee which sat on the subject rejected the proposition in regard to the country at large, and decided on special

grounds that the plan might only be safely adopted in respect to the Universities. His own belief was that the system was bad. It had not the good effect of open voting. 'It escapes from that which you have always claimed as the great advantage of open voting—that is, the general publicity and influence of public opinion, and what you call the salutary effect of a man performing a great public duty in the face of his fellow-men.'

It was claimed that the system was permissive; but whilst it altogether sheltered a man from public opinion, it did not in the least give him the advantages of secret voting. Lord Cranborne had spoken of sick people and nervous people, and others who could not go to the poll, but he (Mr. Bright) did not believe that there was any appreciable number of voters who could not go to the poll for the reasons assigned. It was mainly for the rich that this system was devised. 'And what happens when the voting papers have been signed and sent in? You establish one of the most hateful and most unheard-of things that can be imagined, which is the giving of votes by proxy. I understand that lately there has been a discussion in another place on the subject of voting by proxy, and there is a general impression that this systemwhich no man defends upon any principle-will not last long. Therefore, I hope the House of Commons will not now attempt to establish in any shape anything so unprincipled and hateful with regard to our Parliamentary elections as this would prove to be.

Because, when any person has received a number of voting-papers from any borough or part of a county, it is quite clear that he can either poll them or not, as he thinks fit. He can hold them back, or make a They are not exactly bank-notes ;

traffic of them.

but as he holds them in his hand, he may traffic with them as if they were bank-notes. Now, I think it

"Better to bear the ills we have

Than fly to others that we know not of."'

The whole question was this-whether the system of polling should be changed to what is right, or whether it should be a general system of voting through the Post Office. Let them have either open voting or the ballot. If the present proposition were adopted, it would create amazement and consternation throughout the country.

The Reform Bill passed the House of Commons on the 15th of July, and on the following day it was read a first time in the House of Lords. The second reading was taken a few days later without a division; but when the measure was discussed in committee, many important changes were introduced, which had the effect of rendering the bill more conservative and reactionary. In closing the debate on the third reading, Lord Derby said they were taking a leap in the dark, but he entertained a strong hope that the extended franchise would be the means of placing the institutions of the country on a firmer basis.

The Lords' amendments excited considerable indignation in the country, and meetings were held