vious night, that a Vote should not be taken.

MR. WHITWELL also complained of the uncertainty and confusion created by Votes being taken out of the regular | order.

MR. R. N. FOWLER thought a Notice at two o'clock could not make up for the want of it the previous night.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

(13.) £1,644,308, Inland Revenue Department.

MR. WHITWELL said, he would suggest an amalgamation of the Customs and the Inland Revenue Collecting Departments in small town, where the income hardly equalled the expenditure.

MR. BAXTER said, no such scheme was at present in contemplation, and the question was too large a one to be discussed at a late hour without Notice.

Vote agreed to.

MR. R. N. FOWLER replied, that the Home Secretary would really be the person responsible, though the Privy Council might be nominally responsible. But if that were not so it only made his argument stronger. He had confidence in the present Home Secretary, but if the power rested with some Member of the Government not named-perhaps the Secretary of the Treasury-it only made matters worse. However it might be, the measure was calculated to give greatly increased prominence to political differences of opinion in every borough in the country, and would place power in the hands of the Government to dispose of in furtherance of their own political views. That was needless, for the Government had quite enough to do as it was, without having imposed on them the regulation of the affairs of every municipal borough in the kingdom. The Bill, if passed, therefore could not fail to give Government interference which it sanctioned, and it would lead to unlimited municipal dissensions wherever it was put into operation. If one Government made a change the next would be appealed to as soon as they came in to undo what their predecessors had done. He would, therefore, move that it be read a third time on that day three months.

(14.) £2,609,814, Post Offices Ser- great dissatisfaction on account of the

vices, &c.

House resumed.

Committee report Progress.

Resolutions to be reported upon Monday next;

Committee to sit again upon Monday

next.

MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS (WARDS)
BILL.-[BILL 102.]

(Mr. Winterbotham, Mr. Secretary Bruce.)

THIRD READING.

Order for Third Reading read. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read the third time."-(Mr. Winterbotham.)

MR. R. N. FOWLER said, he thought the correct title of this Bill would be "a Bill for the Encouragement of Municipal and Political Jobbery." The great object of the House should be to prevent municipal contests becoming political. The Bill gave the Home Secretary the power to manipulate the municipal wards in every town in the kingdom, and he would naturally manipulate them in the interests of his own political party.

MR. WINTERBOTHAM said, the Home Secretary's name was not mentioned from one end of the Bill to the other. The power was given to the Privy Council.

Mr. Sclater-Booth

Amendment proposed, to leave out the word "now," and at the end of the Question to add the words " upon this day three months."-(Mr. Robert Fowler.)

MR. STEVENSON said, the hon. Member ignored altogether the cases in which, owing to altered local circumstances, some reconstruction of the wards was absolutely necessary. It was an exaggeration to impute to the Bill mere wanton interference with municipalities for political purposes. In practice it was impossible to procure the sanction of two-thirds of the Town-Councils for a re-arrangement of the wards, and thus, under the existing law, no such re-arrangement could be made without the expensive process of an Act of Parliament.

MR. ASSHETON CROSS said, that before they altered the law they were bound to show there was a real practical grievance. One or two cases might, perhaps, be adduced in which the neces

sary two-thirds vote could not be obtained; but in those cases was not the majority in the right? A majority of two-thirds could always be obtained if a re-arrangement were required for municipal purposes; the only other object must be political; the House should not encourage municipal re-arrangements for political purposes; and as no municipal necessity had been shown, he supported the law as settled by his own Bill passed in 1859.

MR. WINTERBOTHAM observed, that as the hon. Gentleman introduced a measure dealing with this question in 1859, he evidently believed that at that time there was a real grievance; and it was for the hon. Gentleman to show that it had now ceased to exist. There was, however, nothing in the Bill to indicate a political object, and, as a matter of fact, the increase of population and wealth in prosperous boroughs required changes in the distribution of wards; and many applications had been made to the Home Office for changes of this character to be introduced into Local Government Bills. The machinery of the Bill had been adopted from the Act of the hon. Member; and, as he considered that the question should not be regarded from a party point of view, he was anxious to prevent the measure being used for political purposes. As in the present Bill, so in the Act of 1859, it was provided that applications should be made to the Privy Council; and, therefore, the objections of the hon. Member for Falmouth (Mr. R. N. Fowler) failed. If an evil be recognized by onethird, they may make out a case for submission to the Privy Council; and this Bill contained a safeguard against abuse. He should therefore be sorry to see the House reject it.

MR. J. LOWTHER said, he thought that the authorities on the Treasury Bench did not display any intimate knowledge of the practice in America on these questions, for in that country as soon as the question was decided one way there was an agitation for the readjustment of boundaries. He hoped the House would hesitate before they handed over power as was now proposed. He had never heard any great desire expressed for the alteration proposed by the present Bill, and he trusted the hon. Member would persevere with his Motion for the rejection of the Bill.

MR. KAY-SHUTTLEWORTH said, that his attention had been called to the difficulties which existed in relation to the ward representation in many boroughs, and especially in the borough which he represented; and, on behalf of his constituents, he had no hesitation in most heartily supporting the Bill.

MR. BIRLEY said, he was inclined to think that the hon. Member for Stroud (Mr. Winterbotham) was hasty in saying that the provisions of the Bill were satisfactory. In the course of time the Bill might have a very evil effect, for minorities in corporations and in boroughs might act in accordance with the wishes of an unpopular and tyrannical Government, and alter wards, and thereby change the political and social condition of the municipalities.

MR. COLLINS said, he thought it would be advisable to wait until the effect of the Act of last year taken in conjunction with the Bill introduced by the hon. Member for South-west Lancaster had been ascertained before further legislation on the subject was attempted.

MR. LEEMAN held that the Bill would be found useful, and that the House would do well to pass it, though he thought in some respects it scarcely went far enough.

Question put, "That the word 'now' stand part of the Question."

The House divided:-Ayes 67; Noes 34: Majority 33.

Main Question put, and agreed to.
Bill read the third time, and passed.

CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT ACT
(1871) AMENDMENT BILL—[BILL 157.]
(Mr. Vernon Harcourt, Mr. James, Mr. Mundella,
Mr. Dixon, Mr. Melly.)

SECOND READING.

Order for Second Reading read.

MR. VERNON HARCOURT, in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said, he must express his regret that at that advanced period of the Session he could not hope to proceed with it beyond the present stage with any prospect of success; but in consequence of the defective state of the law upon the subject, a measure of this kind was required. Under the Act of 1871 convictions had been obtained and sentences

passed which were utterly contrary to | to the working men, who were liable, the intention of the Legislature. The under the existing law, to imprisonment Bill provided that watching or "picket- for mere picketing, without any violence ing" should not be subject to a criminal being used. Baron Bramwell had decharge, so long as violence was not used. cided that picketing was not in itself an That was the only issue raised, and, illegal act, and yet there had recently briefly stated, the object of the Bill was been convictions, with sentences of three to make the law clearer than it was at months' imprisonment, for simply walkpresent, and to remove all ambiguity as ing up and down in front of a house to picketing. Hon. Members themselves without the slightest attempt at coercion. were subjected to picketing by the All the working men asked was, that Whips, who, however, were not sent to they should be put on the same footing prison, and did not have their hair cut in the eye of the law with the other for putting moral pressure on Members. classes of the community. He believed it would give satisfaction to the working classes.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."-(Mr. Vernon Harcourt.)

LORD ELCHO moved the adjournment of the debate. A Bill of such importance could not be properly discussed at that hour (1.30 A.M.). Moreover, as a Trades Union Commissioner, he thought the Act of last year, dealing with trades unions and regulating labour generally, ought to be continued for another year, and then the Government might amend that Act if necessary.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Debate be now adjourned.' -(Lord Elcho.)

MR. COLLINS said, there would have been a better chance of the Bill passing had it simply defined the Act of last year, which was grossly misinterpreted

in some localities.

MR. MUNDELLA said, he trusted that the House would discuss so important a question even at that late hour in the morning. It could not be denied that under the existing Act some exceedingly harsh convictions had taken place. Men had been imprisoned and put on the treadmill for simply passing up and down before a door. Did the noble Lord (Lord Elcho), who was so anxious to shelve this Bill, remember that during the whole of the week he had been ex

erting himself to hedge the mine-owners round with all sorts of protection? Would the House consent to send a master to MR. BRUCE admitted that there had the treadmill for an offence which was been some very singular decisions under equivalent to picketing? They had heard the Act, especially for the offence of from the hon. Member for Merthyr (Mr. picketing, as it was called, being the Fothergill) the dreadful results that act of watching workmen with a view would follow upon sending a mine-owner to their coercion; but he did not expect to the treadmill. The hon. Member had they would be repeated. He could not, made the whole House shudder with his however, consent to remove picketing description of the clipping of the minefrom the category of special offences, nor owner's hair, until one could almost did he think it would be proper to dis-imagine he felt the scissors among his cuss such important questions as were own ambrosial curls. connected with this Bill at so advanced an hour in the morning. He differed from his hon. and learned Friend when he said this Bill would give satisfaction to the working classes. The numerous communications he had received showed that they objected to special legislation on their behalf, and that they preferred On Motion of Mr. FORDYCE, Bill to amend the the general law of the country. The Law of Scotland in regard to the right of proBill not only went further than the Go-perty in Buildings erected by Agricultural vernment wished, but its introduction Tenants, ordered to be brought in by Mr. FORwas altogether premature. DYCE and Mr. M'COMBIE.

MR. JAMES said, he objected to delay in passing a Bill of this kind, which was essentially requisite in order to do justice Mr. Vernon Harcourt

After short discussion,

Question put.

The House divided:-Ayes 32; Noes 30: Majority 2.

Debate adjourned till Monday next.

FARM BUILDINGS (SCOTLAND) BILL.

Bill presented, and read the first time. [Bill 231.]

Ilouse adjourned at half after Two o'clock till Monday next.

Third Reading-Boundaries of Counties (Ire- securities for secrecy, and these involve land)* (180), and passed.

as Amendments. It may have been | ference to your Lordships' views, the -and I believe it was the case-that House of Commons have given up their some few words of Lord Hartington's own deliberately formed opinion, and clauses were omitted because they would adopted a principle which your Lordnot have fitted into the clauses of the ships thought more desirable. But while present Bill; but the statement I made to thus showing themselves anxious to your Lordships was quite correct. Now, come to an agreement with your Lordmy Lords, it might be convenient that I ships in reference to this measure, we should at once state to your Lordships know from what has passed in "another which are the Amendments on which we place" that the House of Commons has think it important to insist. I will ask refused no less distinctly to concur with your Lordships to insist on your Amend-your Lordships' Amendment for the inment giving an optional Ballot. I will ask you to retain in the 33rd clause the words introduced on the Motion of my noble Friend (Earl Beauchamp), and which have reference to the duration of the Bill; and also the words which provide that the declaration of an illiterate voter shall be made before the presiding election officer, instead of before a magis

trate.

On Question? Commons Amendment agreed to, as far as "having."

troduction of an optional Ballot, because they believe it would be fatal to the objects for which this measure is designed. And, indeed, my Lords, I find it difficult to imagine how it can be seriously argued that the system involved in your Lordships' Amendment is one which would secure to the elector the advantages contemplated by those who desire to see the Ballot introduced at the

Parliamentary and municipal elections of this country. My Lords, I suppose none of the advocates of the Ballot desire it simply for the purpose of making a a change in the established mode of voting and irrespective of positive advantages which the Ballot as a system possesses; but I think it can be shown beyond question that the plan proposed in the Amendment of your Lordships is one which would effect a change, with

THE MARQUESS OF RIPON: The question your Lordships now have to consider is whether you will or will not insist on the adoption of the system which has been called the optional Ballot. I must say I heard with very great regret the statement just now made by the noble Duke to the effect that he intends to advise your Lordships to insist on the Amend-out bringing about any one of the adment of this House which introduced vantages which those who advocate a that system into this Bill. It appears Ballot Bill believe would follow from to me, my Lords, that the system is the adoption of an honest and straightaltogether inconsistent with the prin- forward Ballot. It further appears to ciples and objects of the Bill, and that me, my Lords, that this proposed sysif your Lordships insist on your Amend- tem of leaving open voting or secret ment you will render the whole measure, voting optional is one that would tend so far as its real principle as a Ballot very much to perpetuate those very evils Bill is concerned, a mere sham. I ask which the Ballot is intended to put an end your Lordships to consider the position to. The case of intimidation is perhaps in which this question stands at the stronger than that of bribery. I ventured present moment. By the Amendment to submit to your Lordships on a former which your Lordships introduced, and occasion that this plan of an optional Balwhich has been accepted by the House lot would merely have the effect of shifting of Commons the Amendment with the operation of bribery or intimidation which your Lordships have just been from one point to another. My noble dealing-you have secured the admis- Friend the noble Marquess opposite sion in this measure of a plan which (the Marquess of Salisbury) said it will make it possible that a vote may be would not; that if men were determined followed on a scrutiny. Your Lordships on intimidation they could have it under are aware that in the last and present any system, because they could say to Sessions the House of Commons, by the voter-" You shall not vote at large majorities, refused to adopt that all;" but surely the noble Marquess system, because they wished that by will admit that there is much less voting by Ballot there should be com-risk of intimidation being exercised for plete secrecy for the voter; but in de- the purpose of keeping men away from

The Duke of Richmond