1865.] REDUCTION OF THE FRANCHISE.

257

money. It was expected that these reductions would afford a relief of taxation amounting to 5,420,000l., of which 3,778,000l. would take effect during the present financial year; leaving a surplus of 253,0007.

Mr. Baines again brought forward his measure for the reduction of the franchise, on Wednesday, 3rd of May, to some fourteen or fifteen members. The smallness of the attendance seemed to show a want of interest in the subject, which was in some degree accounted for by the general feeling that prevailed of the inutility of introducing such a measure in a parliament which, being near its end, was not likely to pass this fragment of reform. The debate was chiefly remarkable for a speech delivered by Mr. Lowe. Though he had been a member of this ministry, and though his views on most questions agreed with those of his late colleagues, yet he differed from them and the liberal party generally on this subject, and made a very able speech in opposition to the motion. It was applauded to the echo by the conservative party, as well as by some of those who, professing to desire and pledged to support parliamentary reform, really abhorred and dreaded it as much as its avowed opponents. When the subject again came before the house on the 8th of May, there was a large gathering of members, and everything betokened a close division. This was due not so much to any extraordinary interest taken in the question, as to the proximity of the general election, and the knowledge that this measure was the one which was likely to be the working question of the coming election. The debate on it was therefore of a very animated character. Sir G. Grey, speaking on behalf of the government, maintained that he and his colleagues had fully redeemed their reform pledges; but declined to give any promise as to the course which the government would take with regard to the measure in the next session. Mr. Gladstone sat by in silence. It was reported that his colleagues had extorted from him a promise not to speak on the question. But there was no truth in the statement. He had delivered his testimony on this subject during the preceding session in the most distinct manner, and it was not necessary that he should renew it now. On a division, the previous question, moved by Lord Elcho, was carried by 288 votes to 214. During the remainder of the session the members of the

VOL. III.

S

house were speaking rather to their constituents than to the gentlemen, generally very few in number, who sat in the house. Early in the month of June they were putting forward their claims and opinions in addresses to the constituencies they represented, or which they hoped to represent in the next parliament. The house therefore was fitfully full and empty; members rushing down by rail to their constituents, and hurrying back again to the metropolis whenever any question in which those constituents took an interest was before the house. Bills were passed with even greater rapidity than is usual towards the end of a session.

One question, however, being of a personal nature, filled the house and brought on a severe party struggle. (Lord Chancellor Westbury had shown himself a most effective law-reformer. He had also shown himself to be, both before and since his appointment to his high office, but more especially since, a master of biting sarcasm, which told all the more severely on those against whom it was levelled in consequence of the soft and mellifluous tones in which it was delivered; so that his blows were not inaptly compared to those of a mailed hand covered with a velvet glove. His law reforms had rendered him very unpopular with many members of his own profession, without having procured for him much favour with the public. He had been led-in one instance by good-nature, and in another by carelessness-to allow a member of his family to make use of his patronage, in a manner calculated to damage his office and lower his character. Unfortunately the charges that were made against him, instead of undergoing a calm and judicial investigation, were considered by the House of Commons; and were taken up there, as such matters too frequently are, not so much with a desire to vindicate the character of public men, as with the purpose of inflicting a blow on the party and the government to which Lord Westbury belonged. That he had been guilty of reprehensible laxity there can be no doubt. But this might to a certain extent be excused in consideration of the immense demand which the duties of his high office must make on its holder, as well as the special and most honourable labours which Lord Westbury had undertaken. But even if his conduct had

1865.]

LORD WESTBURY.

259

been less excusable, the manner of his condemnation was such as reasonable men could hardly approve. The following resolution was moved by Mr. Ward Hunt, who afterwards filled the office of chancellor of the exchequer: That the evidence taken before the committee of the House of Lords in the case of Leonard Edmonds, and laid before this house, shows a laxity of practice and a want of caution on the part of the lord chancellor in sanctioning the grant of retiring pensions to public officers over whose heads grave charges are impending, and filling-up the vacancies made by the retirement of such officers, whereby great encouragement has been given to corrupt practices; and that such laxity and want of caution, even in the absence of any improper motives, are in the opinion of the house highly reprehensible, and calculated to throw discredit on the administration of the high offices of state.' Mr. Bouverie moved the 'previous question.'

The defence offered on behalf of the chancellor was received, not with the demeanour of men engaged in the calm and judicial examination of an important question very seriously affecting the character of a person in high office, but with continual interruption, loud shouts of derisive laughter, and importunate cries for a division. It was evident that a large portion of the members had come up not to judge, but to condemn or acquit. If the division had taken place a week earlier, the supporters of the ministry would have been in the majority, and Lord Westbury would have been absolved; as it was, the conservative whip had been more successful than the liberal whip; or rather, perhaps, the desire to brand Lord Westbury was stronger than the desire to clear him. It was evident the vote of censure would be carried. Lord Palmerston endeavoured, by moving an adjournment, to evade the blow aimed at the government, knowing that it would be supported by many members who were not prepared to vote with Mr. Bouverie, and that if it should be carried, the crowd which had been brought up with so much diffi culty to vote on this question would be dispersed over the kingdom, and could not be collected again. The adjournment was, however, rejected by 177 voices to 163; and Lord Palmerston adroitly accepted the division as representing the feeling of the House with regard to Mr

Bouverie's motion, and thus avoided a still more signal defeat.

Lord Palmerston did not hesitate to declare, that in his opinion Lord Westbury had been unfairly dealt with. It still remained to be seen in what manner the chancellor would treat the censure. It was announced that his statement would be made on Wednesday the 5th of July. On the evening of that day Lord Westbury took his seat as usual on the woolsack; and there was a very large concourse both of peers and of strangers to hear the expected explanations. When Lord Westbury rose he was listened to with a deep and respectful attention, which was maintained throughout his speech. He explained that he had desired to resign his high functions from the time that the charges, which had drawn down on him the censure of the House of Commons, had been first brought forward, because he thought that it was not fit that a person on whose conduct any shadow of suspicion rested should retain the high office that he held; but that his intention had been combated by Lord Palmerston, who pointed out that if such a precedent were once given, the lord chancellor might be driven from office by any malicious or unscrupulous person who might think proper to bring a charge against him. He said that he had yielded to these considerations, and continued to hold his office till yesterday. He concluded his explanation in these words: 'I have made this statement, my lords, simply in the hope that you will believe, and that the public will believe, that I have not clung to office, much less that I have been influenced by any base or unworthy motive. With regard to the opinion which the House of Commons has pronounced, I do not presume to say a word. I am bound to accept the decision. I may, however, express the hope, that after an interval of time calmer thoughts will prevail, and a more favourable view will be taken of my conduct. I am thankful for the opportunity which my tenure of office has afforded me to propose and pass measures which have received your lordships' approbation, and which I believe--nay, I will venture from experience to predict-will be productive of great benefit to the country. With these measures I hope my name will be associated. I regret deeply that a great measure which I had at heart-I refer to the formation of

1865.]

LORD WESTBURY.

261

a digest of the whole law-I have been unable to inaugurate; for it was not until this session that the means were afforded by parliament for that purpose. That great scheme I bequeath, already prepared, into the hands of my suc cessor. As to the future, I can only venture to promise that it will be my anxious endeavour, in the character of a private member of your lordships' house, to promote and assist in the accomplishment of all those reforms and improvements in the administration of justice, which I feel yet remain to be carried out. I may add, in reference to the appellate jurisdiction of your lordships' house, that I am happy it is left in a state which I think will be found satisfactory. There will not be at the close of the session a single judgment in arrear, save one in which the arguments, after occupying several days, were brought to a conclusion only the day before yesterday. In the Court of Chancery, I am thankful to be able to inform your lordships, I do not think there will remain at the end of this week one appeal unheard, or one judgment undelivered. I mention these things simply to show that it has been my earnest desire, from the moment I assumed the seals of office, to devote all the energies I possessed, and all the industry of which I was capable, to the public service. My lords, it only remains for me to thank you, which I do most sincerely, for the kindness which I have uniformly received at your hands. It is very possible that by some word inadvertently used-some abruptness of manner-I may have given pain, or have exposed myself to your unfavourable opinion. If that be so, I beg you to accept the sincere expression of my regret, while I indulge the hope that the circumstance may be erased from your memory.'

It was generally felt that nothing he had done in his office, and he had effected much, better became him than his manner of leaving it; and that he had thus fully atoned for the errors into which he had fallen.

At twelve o'clock on the day following this scene, parliament was prorogued with the formalities usual on such occasions, prior to its dissolution; and now men's thoughts were at once turned towards the election of the new parliament. Much had been said for months past of the great conservative reaction' which was alleged to be going