THE BERRY INFLUENCE, 1875-1882 215 



which they had not been officially advised. A reasonable discussion 

 as to the possibility of dovetailing the two Bills into a strong and 

 acceptable measure was not to Mr. Berry's taste, so he fell back 

 upon the old methods of strife, and sought to stop all business by 

 adjourning the Assembly until the Council yielded. Informal con- 

 ferences were held by leaders of various parties, both in Parliament 

 and outside, and public opinion loudly admonished Berry to come 

 to terms. In May the Council evidenced their desire for a settle- 

 ment by considering the Bill in committee, and suggesting some 

 amendments that would justify them in passing it. When the 

 amendments came before the Assembly, they were subjected to 

 fierce criticism, and most of them were rejected. Finally, in June 

 a conference was agreed to, the recommendations of its managers 

 were eventually accepted, and the Legislative Council Eeform Bill 

 of 1881 found a place in the Statute-book. It increased the num- 

 ber of members from thirty to forty-two ; reduced the expense of 

 candidature by dividing the six provinces into fourteen, returning 

 three members each; shortened the tenure from ten years to six; 

 extended the franchise to all freeholders of 10 annual value and to 

 leaseholders rated at 25 ; and the property qualification of mem- 

 bers was cut down from 150 to 100 per annum from real estate. 

 With the exception of an amending Act in 1890, which increased 

 the number of members to forty-eight, the constitution of the Council 

 remained as indicated above until the end of the century. The Act 

 of 1881 increased the number of voters on the electoral rolls from 

 about 30,000 to over 100,000, as against some 200,000 qualified to 

 vote for the Assembly. It was no longer possible to deny the repre- 

 sentative character of the Upper House, or to brand it as " a clique 

 of money grubbers, worthily representing their own kind," in the 

 choice language used in the Assembly by a prominent politician of 

 the day. It had been a useful Chamber of review and check, and 

 because its position had been rendered unassailable by the original 

 Constitution Act, the rampant patriots, who averred that the im- 

 pulsive will of the people should not be crossed, hated it with vigour 

 and abused it with mendacious virulence. It had come well through 

 the ordeal, and a widening popularity followed its ready adoption 

 of the long discussed reforms. The fact that it could not be dis- 



