Page:History of the Radical Party in Parliament.djvu/449

1859-] Resignation of Aberdeen to Dissolution in 1859. 435 ment of freeholders living in boroughs, and other conditions which rendered its action uncertain. The most amazing thing about it was the method of dealing with the borough franchise. The whole reason why a Reform Bill had been found to be necessary was the demand, which all parties had admitted to be irresistible, of the populations of towns for some direct voice in the choice of representatives, and this was the one thing which was practically refused. The household franchise in boroughs was to be left at 10. Every imaginary claim was to be acknowledged, but the real and solid one was rejected. Stockholders, savings-bank depositors, graduates of universities, ministers of religion, and certificated school- masters were all to have votes ; but the mass of the working classes were still to be excluded. There was also a little tinkering with redistribution. Fifteen small boroughs were to be deprived of one member each, and the number was to be distributed over three counties and six new boroughs. The plan was condemned the moment it was known. Russell declared at once that it would be opposed at every stage ; and Mr. Bright objected to the total exclusion of the working classes, and to the "fancy franchises," which were absurd and delusive. Leave was given to bring in the bill, but there was little doubt as to its fate. Its first effect, however, was to cause a split in the Ministry itself. Walpole and Henley both resigned the former because of the reduction of the county franchise and the latter partly because he also objected to the identity of franchise, but also because he wanted a real bill which would admit more of the working people. On the 2ist of March the second reading was moved, and a long discussion took place, lasting altogether for eight nights. Nearly every Liberal speaker condemned the bill ; but Roebuck was one of the few who thought that, instead of its being summarily rejected, it might be served as the India Bill had been taken possession of by the House and altered to suit the wishes of the majority. This was evidently a method impossible with such a measure, and on the 3 1st of March the division took place, and the Govern-