dance with the
distribution of population; (2) the extension of the franchise to
classes of men at present debarred; (3) the abolition of the plural
vote; and (4) the enfranchisement of women.

[Footnote 124: Government of England, I., 213. On
the franchise system see Anson, Law and Custom of
the Constitution, I., Chap. 4 and Lowell, _op.
cit._, I., Chap. 9.]

*92. The Question of Redistribution of Seats.*--As has been pointed out,
the Redistribution of Seats Act of 1885 established constituencies in
which there was some approach to equality. The principle was far from
completely carried out. For example, the newly created borough of
Chelsea contained upwards of 90,000 people, while the old borough of
Windsor had fewer than 20,000. But the inequalities left untouched by
the act were slight in comparison with those which have arisen during
a quarter of a century in which there has been no reapportionment
whatsoever. In 1901 the least populous constituency of the United
Kingdom, the borough of Newry in Ireland, contained but 13,137 people,
while the southern division of the county of Essex contained 217,030;
yet each was represented by a single member. This means, of course, a
gross disparity in the weight of popular votes, and, in effect, the
over-representation of certain sets of opinions and interests. In
January, 1902, an amendment to a parliamentary address urging the
desirability of redistribution was warmly debated in the Commons, and,
on the eve of its fall, in the summer of 1905, the Balfour government
submitted a Redistribution Resolution designed to meet the demands of
the "one vote, one value" propagandists. At this time it was pointed
out that whereas immediately after the reform of 1885 the greatest
ratio of disparity among the constituencies was 5.8 to 1, in twenty
years it had risen to 16.5 to 1. The plan proposed provided for the
fixing of the average population to be represented by a member at from
50,000 to 65,000, the giving of eighteen additional seats to England
and Wales and of four to Scotland, the reduction of Ireland's quota by
twenty-two, and such further readjustments as would bring down the
ratio of greatest disparity to 6.8 to 1. Under a ruling of the Speaker
to the effect that the resolution required to be divided into eight or
nine parts, to be debated separately, the proposal was withdrawn. It
was announced that