of the ministerial scheme. The noble Lord commenced his speech by observing that with reference to the satisfactory state of this country, in its home and foreign relations, he thought the present was a more proper time for considering this subject than when the country was in a state of agitation and excitement. After a brief exposition of the principles upon which such a measure should be based, and adverting to the importance of the functions performed by that House, Lord John noticed the prominent features of various schemes of Parliamentary reform that had been proposed antecedent to the Act of 1832, and explained the main objects contemplated by that great measure, namely the disfranchisement of nomination boroughs and the enfranchisement of large towns then excluded from the representation. It was not then intended that there should be no boroughs with small constituencies. He thought it would be extremely unwise, and that it would destroy the balance of the constitution, to say that only counties and large cities and towns should enjoy the franchise, excluding small representations. In regard to disfranchisement, therefore, the present Bill proposed to disfranchise only in cases of proved corruption, and by another Bill he should propose to make a considerable change in the mode of inquiry into cases of corruption, whereby, upon an address of the House, founded even upon common fame, it should be lawful for the Crown to appoint a Commission, clothed with the same powers of inquiry as those which had been so effectual in the case of St. Albans. In respect to the extension of the franchise, the grounds upon which the present measure proceeded were, first, that the Reform Act, in requiring a 101. qualification for household voting, had placed the suffrage rather too high; secondly, -and this consideration had great influence upon his mind-the growing intelligence of the people. He proposed, therefore, to reduce the household qualification to 5l. rated value, which would add a great number of persons to the constituency, to whom he was persuaded the franchise might be safely intrusted. He did not propose to change the general constitution of the county qualification, but he thought that if persons with a qualification of 20l. a-year rated value were entitled to sit on juries, they could not be unfit to be intrusted with the county franchise. It was proposed, likewise, to reduce the qualification derived from copyholds and long leases from 10l. to 51., and to give the county franchise to persons paying 40s. a-year assessed taxes who lived without the limits of a borough, and who were now excluded from voting. There had been an outcry, Lord John observed, against small boroughs, founded upon a false assumption that all such places were infected with corruption, whereas many were not liable to this reproach, which did attach to certain large towns. But it was said, not only did the influence of property prevail in such small boroughs, but that in some cases it approached the character of direct nomination. In order to remove this reproach, it was proposed, in the case of boroughs having less than 500 electors, to add thereto neighbouring places, and as most of these small boroughs were situated in agricultural counties, the general England.] re balance of interests established by the Reform Act would not be disturbed. Upon the subject of a property qualification for members, he retained the opinion he had last year, and he had introduced a clause in the Bill repealing all the Acts since the Act of Anne by which property qualifications were quired. It appeared to him, also, that the state of the oaths taken at the table of the House was not such as could be consistently maintained. This Bill, therefore, proposed to alter these oaths, and in one of them he had not inserted the words "on the true faith of a Christian." The Bill would further provide that, upon a change of offices held under the Crown, vacation of the seat and re-election should not be required. The noble Lord stated the few slight alterations he contemplated with respect to Scotland and Ireland. Although he did not propose to alter the county franchise in the latter country, he did propose to reduce that for cities and boroughs In conclusion, he from 81. to 5l. observed, that the question of franchise was not dissociated with that of the instruction and education of the people, and he was convinced that, if in another session of Parliament the House should take into consideration the means of establishing a really national system of education, it would confer one of the greatest blessings the country could receive. Mr. Hume did not receive the Bill in a very favourable manner. He complained of several omissions in the scheme, and especially that the subjects of the ballot and of triennial Parliaments were evaded. Sir J. Walsh reproached Lord J. Russell with again tampering with the institutions of the country, after having carried a comprehensive measure of reform that was to obviate the necessity of further Mr. H. Berkeley thought the noble Lord's Bill, though it would not be altogether approved, would be generally agreeable to the country. He ought, however, to have given voters a protection at the polling places by adopting the ballot. Mr. P. Howard spoke generally in favour of the measure. Sir R. Inglis protested against the meditated alteration of the oath of abjuration-a matter utterly unconnected with the subject of Parliamentary reform, and he trusted that the House would not sanction this part of the Bill. Mr. Bright said, although he disapproved of some portions of the measure, which fell short of what the country expected, still there were other portions which would give some degree of satisfaction to large classes. He regretted that Lord John had not, by the ballot, taken out of the hands of employers the power of influencing the employed. He thought the county franchise, reduced to 201., still too high, and urged that the principle. of disfranchisement should have been carried further, that larger constituencies should have additional representatives, or that new constituencies should be created. Mr. Baillie pointed out what he considered the defects and deficiencies of the Bill, which would prevent, he thought, its becoming a permanent measure, or securing the confidence of the great body of The present sincere Reformers. must bear all the Ministers responsibility of this attempt to [C 2] renew and promote agitation, made by them in order to retain office. Mr. Roche examined the measure on the supposition that it was to be applied in its integrity to Ireland. Mr. Newdegate commented unfavourably upon the attempt to include in the measure an utterly incongruous provision, for the purpose of doing away with the sanction of Christianity to their deliberations. Sir Joshua Walmsley predicted an unfavourable reception for the measure through the country. Mr. C. Anstey approved of it as an "instalment" of reform. Sir J. Tyrrell, in a humorous speech, recommended that this milk-andwater measure should be entitled, "A Bill to retain the Ministers in Office." In answer to a question as to what day he proposed to fix for the second reading, Lord John Russell mentioned the 23rd of Feb ruary. Mr. Disraeli addressed himself particularly to this point, -as to the time which should be allowed for considering the Bill. Support ing his argument by reference to the Reform Bill and the Corn Law Repeal Bill, he said it was very unusual for a Minister to come forward and make a statement introductory to a Bill without being able to produce the document itself. "I would object to this course of proceeding, even if I assumed that the Bill was delayed by some mere technicality, and that, after the seventeen or twenty-seven Cabinet Councils which have been held, Ministers have really made up their minds on the question. But when we know that Ministers continue to meet daily, the case assumes a very different aspect. The Bill, when produced, may be invested with a great many details which the noble Lord has it not in his power to communicate to us. If when the Bill is laid upon the table we find in it anything which may not agree with or be additional to the statement we have been favoured with to-night, that would be a reason for a longer interval between the first and second reading than the noble Lord proposes. Considering the importance of the question considering that the Minister himself has not made up his mind, apparently, to the details of his own measure, I do not, I think, ask too much in demanding a longer time for consideration. I think it is much better that we should have a month, and that is not a great deal more than three Parliamentary weeks, to enable the country to make itself acquainted with the measure." For himself he was disinclined to discussion on the present occasion. He therefore contented himself with a sarcasm at the Reformers for the pleasing contentment which they had manifested at the short commons of reform now vouchsafed to their keen appetite; an argument or two against Mr. Bright's principle of giving to Manchester a great number of members because such places as Retford have two; and the expression of a hope that the proposal to enlarge small boroughs would not be tainted by a repetition of the not very creditable manoeuvres which distinguished the settlement of the boundaries of agricultural boroughs by the Reform Act. However, his opinion of the Bill, as he collected its purport from Lord John Russell's statement, was that it would not call for opposition as being opposed to the constitutional arrangement of interests now existing: his doubt was, whether the measure were sufficiently comprehensive for the question and interests it undertook to deal with. He hoped that the time of Parliament would not be occupied with this measure to the exclusion of other important topics. The whole system of our colonial government, and the principle on which the taxation of the country was to be based, were subjects on which the people of this country felt much anxiety. And there was likewise a great desire to see the legal reform that was promised carried out. These measures required considerable time and mature consideration, and these were strong reasons for not occupying the time of the House exclusively upon this measure of Parliamentary reform. Sir George Grey could scarcely tell whether the speech of Mr. Disraeli was addressed to the supporters or the opponents of the measure. He did not dissent from the principle, yet he asked for a month's delay, to commence the amalgamation of boroughs, -a question of detail fit for consideration on the second reading. Sir George hoped that the House would not consent to such a proposal, or permit the Bill to be thrown back to a late period of the session. Sir Benjamin Hall wished that the measure had been more full and comprehensive; but he thought it was unfair to contrast the excitement of 1832 with the calmness now prevailing. In 1832, every stage of the Bill was contested. He recollected dividing upon it at seven in the morning. There were sixteen or seventeen divisions on the introduction of the Bill. Now, however, they had no division, and gentlemen opposite dared not vote against it. When Reformers were taunted with voting for so small a measure, he could only say that they were ready to take all they could get. They would vote for and propose amendments, and try to get more. He agreed that it was wrong to continue the small boroughs, and they would take the sense of the House upon that point. He looked upon this as an important portion of the Bill, and thought it should be regarded narrowly; for, in his opinion, the scheme of congregating the towns together would make the county constituencies more corrupt, and place them more in the hands of the landlords. Lord Dudley Stuart took the same line of moderate approbation of the measure, and of explanatory apology for the political calm now pervading the country. He remonstrated, however, against the tone of political condescension towards the people adopted by Lord John Russell, whose notion of conferring the franchise on the people as a reward was exactly that of a potentate in reference to a charter octroyée. Leave was then given to bring in the Bill; but more important issues led to a Ministerial crisis, and the Reform Bill of 1852 was heard of no more. It excited comparatively small interest throughout the community, and, if we may judge from the criticisms pronounced upon it in various quarters, the verdict of the public would, under no circumstances, have been favourable to the mea sure. A question pregnant with far more important results to the political world was the organization of the Militia. The Ministerial proposition for that object was explained by Lord John Russell in a Committee of the whole House on the Local Militia Acts, on the 16th of February. The noble Lord commenced his speech by an exposition of the reasons which had induced the Government to strengthen, at the existing juncture, the defences of the country. To show that the present measure was not taken under the influence of any sort of panic, he recalled to mind, that the similar measure proposed by him, in 1848, was brought forward without any pressure of extraordinary circumstances while, indeed, Louis Philippe was upon the throne of France, and while there was no appearance of revolution; and he assumed that the measure was unsuccessful at that time only because of its connection with other measures. "Unfortunately, that proposition of mine, and other propositions with respect to the naval and military service, were coupled with a proposal for increased taxation, which became very unpalatable to the House and to the country, and the Government did not persevere in the proposal." His reasons for hoping that the House would now take the view of the Government were many. In the first place, the liability of our possessions, or even our own country, to aggression; in the next place, the possibility of disputes between our subjects and foreign subjects. "In the third place, we are bound by treaty with respect to several of the countries of Europe to defend them if at tacked. [A Member, not named, expressed dissent.] Yes; I will only mention one instance: we are bound to defend Portugal against any enemy that might attack that country; an obligation which was avowed by the whole House in 1826, and Mr. Canning called upon the House to fulfil that obligation. But, in the fourth place, we are connected, and have been for more than a century, with the general system of Europe; and any terri torial increase of one power, any aggrandizement which disturbs the general balance of power in Europe, although it might not immediately lead to war, could not be matter of indifference to this country, and would, no doubt, be the subject of conference, and might ultimately, if that balance were seriously threatened, lead to hostilities. Then further, since the invention of steam navigation, and when it is no longer necessary for an enemy to obtain the command of the Channel, we are not safe from invasion, or even the most petty insult." Proceeding to assert that it has always been the policy of this country, ever since the Seven Years' War, to maintain a considerable force of militia, he turned aside for an instant to say a few words on the general policy which the present Government held with respect to our regular army, and on the views of the Commander-inChief with respect to our general armaments. With regard to our military force, I should say that the addition we propose to make to our regular army in the present year is very small, amounting to 4000 men of the Line and 1000 for the Artillery-in all rather a less number of men than have been dispatched to the Cape since the commencement of hostilities in that quarter. I should say that there has been for some time a policy rather to diminish the military force in our Colonies, and rely upon the people of the Colonies themselves to furnish such force as may be necessary, and have only a very small force of our regular army there. We have acted in pursuance of that policy; and I should say generally, I think it is better, with respect to the force we maintain in our Colonies, to have |