arrive when both parties would unite in endeavoring to bring about a solution which would tend to the advantage and benefit of the country.  And yet, says the right honorable gentleman, it was only in 1860 that the portentous truth flashed across the mind of the country—­only in 1860, after so many ministers had been dealing with the question for so many years.  All I can say is that this was the question, and the only question, which engaged the attention of Lord Derby’s cabinet.  The question was whether they could secure the franchise for a certain portion of the working classes, who by their industry, their intelligence, and their integrity, showed that they were worthy of such a possession, without at the same time overwhelming the rest of the constituency by the numbers of those whom they admitted.  That, sir, was the only question which occupied the attention of the government of Lord Derby and yet the right honorable gentleman says that it was in 1860 that the attention of the public was first called to the subject, when, in fact, the question of Parliamentary Reform had been before them for ten years, and on a greater scale than that embraced by the measure under consideration this evening.

I need not remind the house of the reception which Lord Derby’s Bill encountered.  It is neither my disposition, nor, I am sure, that of any of my colleagues, to complain of the votes of this house on that occasion.  Political life must be taken as you find it, and as far as I am concerned not a word shall escape me on the subject.  But from the speeches made the first night, and from the speech made by the right honorable gentleman this evening, I believe I am right in vindicating the conduct pursued by the party with which I act.  I believe that the measure which we brought forward was the only one which has tended to meet the difficulties which beset this question.  Totally irrespective of other modes of dealing with the question, there were two franchises especially proposed on this occasion, which, in my mind, would have done much towards solving the difficulty.  The first was the franchise founded upon personal property, and the second the franchise founded upon partial occupation.  Those two franchises, irrespective of other modes by which we attempted to meet the want and the difficulty—­these two franchises, had they been brought into committee of this house, would, in my opinion, have been so shaped and adapted that they would have effected those objects which the majority of the house desire.  We endeavored in that bill to make proposals which were in the genius of the English constitution.  We did not consider the constitution a mere phrase.  We knew that the constitution of this country is a monarchy tempered by co-ordinate estates of the realm.  We knew that the House of Commons is an estate of the realm; we knew that the estates of the realm form a political body, invested with political power for the government