r.REAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND. 



4M 



ti-nding the Parliamentary franchise to women 

 >sing the statutory qualifications which 

 entitle ill. -in to vote in municipal, parochial, 

 ami school-board elections. Experience of fe- 

 inalo suilV.-iu'-'. he contended, both in the United 

 Kingdom and the United States, was uniformly 

 .ible to it; and he advocated it strictly 

 from a utilitarian point of view, on account of 

 the benefit which it would confer both on the 

 state and on the women themselves. TheChan- 

 cellor of the Exchequer objected to the form of 

 tiic motion, which he thought would commit 

 (lie House to the reopening of the reform ques- 

 tion. Although he believed the elevating in- 

 fluences of female suffrage had been exag- 

 gerated, and did not admit that women were 

 treated unjustly because they had no votes, he 

 was not indisposed, at a proper time and under 

 proper circumstances, to consider the claim for 

 equal treatment. Mr. Blennerhasset contended 

 that the Parliamentary franchise ought to fol- 

 low as a matter of right from the concessions 

 already made; and Mr. Beresford-Hope read 

 extracts from the writings of leading advocates 

 of women's rights, contained in what was de- 

 scribed as the " Ladies' Green Book," to illus- 

 trate the real character of their claims. Mr. 

 Bristowe thought that if the vote were given, 

 the right to be elected must also follow. Sir 

 H. James commented on Mr. Courtney's incon- 

 sistency in proposing to enfranchise some 900,- 

 000 women while he stoutly opposed the ad- 

 mission of the agricultural laborer. He denied 

 woman's fitness for the franchise ; she could not 

 obtain the necessary experience, for a woman's 

 only profession was marriage. What injustice, 

 he said, to women to deprive them of a vote 

 as soon as they became successful in their pro- 

 fession, and to give it only to failures! A quo- 

 tation from the Queen's diary, telling against 

 the measure, provoked a solemn objection from 

 Mr. Sullivan to ' the introduction of the sove- 

 reign's name to influence debate," which the 

 Speaker held was not tenable. Sir Henry final- 

 ly appealed to the Liberal party not to sanction 

 the enfranchisement of a class of all others 

 most subject to influence. Mr. W. E. Forster 

 opposed the motion, not because he doubted 

 the fitness of women, but because he regarded 

 electioneering as man's work, and not woman's. 

 Moreover, he objected to giving a vote without 

 accompanying it with the capacity of being 

 elected. He denied that a majority of the 

 women wished for the vote, and predicted that 

 the motion could never be carried. After some 

 remarks from Sir H. Jackson, who asserted 

 that the franchise \vas desired by considerable 

 numbers of the most distinguished women, the 

 resolution was negatived by 217 to 103. A 

 resolution, moved by an Irish member, Mr. Mel- 

 don, on February 14th, in favor of the assimi- 

 lation of the Irish borough franchise to the 

 system existing in England and Wales, was 

 supported by Mr. W. E. Forster and the Marquis 

 of llartin^ton, but opposed by Mr. Lowther 

 and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, upon the 



ground that there was no necessity for a change 

 in the electoral system BO lately settled. Upon 

 a division, the resolution was rejected by 266 

 to 187. 



On March 12th the Clerical Disabilities Hill, 

 proposed by Mr. Goldney, to enable ck r^\im n 

 of the Church of England without cure of soul* 

 to sit in Parliament, was rejected by 185 to 

 66, Mr. Cross having pointed out that if cler- 

 gymen wanted to come into Parliament, all' 

 they had to do was to take advantage of the 

 act of 1870, which allowed clergymen to lay 

 aside their orders. 



On April 2d Mr. Mundella's bill, repealing 

 the property qualifications for serving on mu- 

 nicipal corporations, boards of guardians, local 

 boards, etc., was discussed. Mr. Bnrt, in sup- 

 porting the bill, mentioned that, though he 

 was capable of sitting in Parliament, he had 

 lived fourteen years in the borough which he 

 represented without being eligible for a mu- 

 nicipal oflice. The bill was thrown out by 178 

 to 167. 



The House of Lords adjourned on April 4th, 

 and the House of Commons on April 7th, for 

 the Easter vacation. 



The continuance of foreign complications fre- 

 quently gave an opportunity to the Opposition 

 to attack the Government. In the House of 

 Commons, the largest share of attention was 

 bestowed on the Greek claims. Mr. Cart- 

 wright about the middle of April moved a 

 resolution, supported by Mr. Gladstone, Sir 

 William Harcourt, and other leading Liberals, 

 demanding the settlement of the question in 

 accordance with the Berlin protocol. He was 

 defeated by a majority of 16. More than three 

 months later Sir Charles Dilke reopened the 

 question in a more elaborate manner, but the 

 debate was adjourned without a decisive divi- 

 sion. Some signs of restlessness and suspi- 

 cion with respect to the Afghan policy of the 

 Government were visible early in the year, 

 which died out rapidly after the announce- 

 ment, on the Ifith of May, that bases of peace 

 with Yakoob Khan had been settled. On the 

 4th of August a vote of thanks was curried in 

 both Houses to the troops engaged in the Af- 

 ghan campaign. The resistance was slight. 



The war in South Africa, which, when Par- 

 liament met in December, 1878, had been 

 looked upon as a matter of minor importance, 

 rose into prominence in February, 1879. A 

 discussion of the whole subject was brought 

 on, when, on the 25th of March, the Marquis 

 of Lansdowne moved a resolution in the House 

 of Lords, censuring Sir Bartle Frere fcr pro- 

 voking Cetywayo to war " without authority 

 from the responsible advisers of the Crown," 

 condemning the inception of an offensive war 

 " without imperative and pressing necessity or 

 adequate preparation," and regretting the main- 

 tenance of the High Commissioner in power 

 after the censure passed upon him in the Colo- 

 nial Secretary's dispatch. The resolution was 

 rejected by a majority of 156 against 61. On 



