repudiation of the rights of man, and, next, the repudiation of the 6 pounds franchise.  The first is a great relief, and, remembering what the feeling of the house was only a year ago, when, by the dangerous but fascinating eloquence of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, we were led to believe that the days of Tom Paine had returned, and that Rousseau was to be rivaled by a new social contract, it must be a great relief to every respectable man here to find that not only are we not to have the rights of man, but we are not even to have the 1862 franchise.  It is a matter, I think, of great congratulation, and I am ready to give credit to the Secretary of State for the honesty with which he has expressed himself, and I only wish we had had the same frankness, the same honesty we always have, arising from a clear view of his subject, in the first year of the Parliament as we have had in the last.  I will follow the example of the right honorable gentleman and his friends.  I have not changed my opinions upon the subject of what is called Parliamentary Reform.  All that has occurred, all that I have observed, all the results of my reflections, lead me to this more and more—­that the principle upon which the constituencies of this country should be increased is one not of radical, but I may say of lateral reform—­the extension of the franchise, not its degradation.  And although I do not wish in any way to deny that we were in the most difficult position when the Parliament of 1859 met, being anxious to assist the crown and the Parliament by proposing some moderate measure which men on both sides might support, we did, to a certain extent, agree to some modification of the 10 pounds franchise—­to what extent no one knows; but I may say that it would have been one which would not at all have affected the character of the franchise, such as I and my colleagues wished to maintain.  Yet I confess that my opinion is opposed, as it originally was, to any course of the kind.  I think that it would fail in its object, that it would not secure the introduction of that particular class which we all desire to introduce, but that it would introduce many others who are totally unworthy of the suffrage.  But I think it is possible to increase the electoral body of the country by the introduction of voters upon principles in unison with the principles of the constitution, so that the suffrage should remain a privilege, and not a right—­a privilege to be gained by virtue, by intelligence, by industry, by integrity, and to be exercised for the common good of the country.  I think if you quit that ground—­if you once admit that every man has a right to vote whom you cannot prove to be disqualified—­you would change the character of the constitution, and you would change it in a manner which will tend to lower the importance of this country.  Between the scheme we brought forward and the measure brought forward by the honorable member for Leeds, and the inevitable conclusion which