19, ASHLEY PLACE, S.W.

The story of the three members’ constituencies is a simple one

and can soon be told. Many attempts to stop and destroy the

Reform Bill were made under the guise of liberality. The project

respecting the three members was one of them. It was thought

that Mr. Disraeli had got to the length of his tether, that

his party would go no further, and that if at this time they

could be induced to recalcitrate, the Liberals who had hitherto

supported the Government must vote with the real enemies of the

Bill, that the Government would be put into a minority, must

go out, and that the Bill would then be defeated. Mr. Disraeli

said in the debate that the Government could not accede to the

proposal, and that the defeat of the Government in the motion

would seriously endanger the Bill. We knew what this meant--viz.,

that his party could not be induced to go further in the way of

concession. Seeing this we said: “We will not throw away the

good we have attained for the purpose of adding six members to

large constituencies, and taking away six from small ones. This

benefit, if it should be desired, can easily be obtained from the

new Parliament when it meets. In the meantime we will insure the

Bill.” We voted for the Government, put them into a majority,

and saved the Bill. But Mr. Disraeli, upon consulting his party

again, found that they deemed the trouble of the contest a

greater evil than yielding the point, and they yielded so far as

four members were concerned. I complained of this, and strove for

Sheffield; but I was told that the party of Mr. Disraeli would

go no further than four members, and so, according to my own

expression, Sheffield was left out in the cold. This is the plain

history of the case. It is a story that could be told of many

other similar attempts to defeat the Bill, which attempts were

defeated by our steady determination to carry the Bill, spite of

calumny, spite of threats, spite of abuse. The Bill is now law,

and is law because a number of Liberals were more far-sighted,

ay, and more disinterested, than those who called themselves

leaders of the Liberal party.

From Palmerston to Disraeli (1856-1876) · 第 75 / 116 题