The Press. — London, England, 1854-03-18 00:00:00

MARCH 18, 1854. of the United States and our own, will ma terially assist us in forming a just opinion of the relative advantages of the two forms of government- The author is Mr. TIMMER HERE, a sensible Whig, and from his work we shall take a few salient points, premising only that every statement he makes is verified by American authorities, and generally by those eminent men, Chancellor KIRI and Mr. Justice STORY. The fi rst question which the framers of the American Constitution had to determine was, " Whether societies of men are really capable " or not of establishing good government by reflection and choice ?" and the cha ra cteris tic conclusion to which they came was, that, for Americans, it was possible, but not for any other people . The problem having been thus satisfactorily solved, a Constitution was framed and adopted by a very small majority, in some important States by " little more than a pre ponderating vote ;" and to this day it is a matter of discussion amongst the statesmen and public writers of America whether " the " Constitution is to be considered as a treaty " between independent States or a federal "or a social compact, or both." It is this Constitution which is frequently referred to as being " founded on the consent of the people." But in truth this was not the case either with the Constitutions of the separate States, or with that of the United States. They were based only on the consent of a majority of iLlimited class, the qualified voters ; and Mr. Justice STORY asserts that there is not " a single State in the Union whose Constitution has not " been adopted against the opinions and wishes " of a large minority ; " and it is notorious that some of them have " been adopted by a small majority ;" even " the American Revolution itself was brought " about against the wishes and resistance of a " formidable minority of the people." America does not recognise any doctrine of abstract right to the franchise ; to extend or diminish its limits is held to be within " the discretion " and competence" of its actual possessors. If no check, therefore, were interposed, the will of a majority would be absolute. To obviate this evil, the articles of the Con stitution were declared to be fundamental and immutable—" the supreme law of the land," of which the interpreter shall be, not " the " individual States, but those high judicial " functionaries whom, in its third article, it " expressly designates for that purpose." Thus, an act passed by Congress by no means neces sarily becomes a law of the United States. " If that act should, in the opinion' of the " judges of the Supreme Court, be contrary to " the written words of the Constitution, it is, " ipso facto, void and of no effect." What would Messrs. COBDEN and BRIGHT say if a Reform Bill could not become law without the consent of the Court of Queen's Bench? Would such a system be the fulness and perfection of self-government? Nevertheless the power of the judges is not ab solute. With a concurrence of the States, nearly amounting to unanimity, the written words of the Constitution may be altered. By these breaks and checks the framers of the Constitu tion designed to guard against a danger to which Republics are peculiarly exposed—the tyranny of a majority. "If a majority be " united by a common interest, the rights of " a minority will be insecure." We may con gratulate ourselves that we need no such safe guards—that by our Constitution, civil and ecclesiastical, by the varied distribution of the franchise, by our hereditary House of Lords, all classes have a voice or vote in the enact ment of laws. Here a majority can scarcely " overbear the wills and a ff ect the interests " of a minority by sudden and hasty acts of " legislation," but time is afforded for mature reflection, so that majorities many acquire moderation, and minorities prepare for anl , " adjust themselves to the coming change. The United States have been obliged to de vise extraordinary securities fo r good govern ment. We will follow the t hread which Mr. T REM ENRERE has furnished , and show, in a future article, by what tendencies these are endangered. THE PRESS. MR. SADLEIR AGAIN. THE last week concluded another chapter in the political history of the too celebrated Mr. SAD LEIR,-by the grace of the Duke of NEWCASTLE, late Lord of the Treasury. After two days' investigation, the jury at Carlow awarded Dowmeo the sum of eleven hundred pounds damages against Mr. SADLEIR for having arrested him, in order to prevent DowLuso from voting against the Coalitionist candi date. Perhaps no man who has sat fur so short a time in the House of Commons has ever been asso ciated with so many grave political scandals as the Irish attorney by whose instrumentality the Peelites obtained the means of supplanting Lord DERBY'S Government. In the present week some of the subordinates of Mr. SADLEIR have been convicted of tampering with the parties who signed the recog nisances to Mr. SOMERS'S petition, endeavouring to make them swear that they were not worth the sums specified in their declarations! Unquestionably, amongst persons and places accused of political malpractices, the names of " SADLEIR " and "Sligo " had become scandalously conspicuous ; anti the latest "transaction," which involves the suppression of further inquiries into some incidents of that corrupt history, may implicate Mr. SADLEIR'S patrons. AN EX CHIEF JUSTICE. THE Sligo Election Committee of 1853 reported in the following terms : " That Jeremiah Joyce O'Donovan, an Alderman of the borough of Sligo, was bribed by Henry Stoner by the pro• miss of payment of lOU, being the portion of an out• standing election account, to forbear giving his vote, which he had promised to Mr. Somers, and in consequence absented himself during the election." Subsequently to this conviction, notwithstanding his Grace the Duke of NEWCASTI.E is a noted purist and colonial reformer, this same Mr. STONOR was ap pointed to be a judge in one of her Majesty's colonies. To illustrate this appointment in the language of the Ministerial organ, " when a man is sent to a colony, a gold colony, and once a penal colony, to take his seat on the bench, and in terpret laws to that mixed and ill organised population, he ought to be not only untainted and unbranded, but above suspicion. He has .to be a model of purity. He has to be honoured and trusted. The colonists are to see in him a singular exception to the corrupt tone of their own dismal society. But, when this image of old virtue has been set up, what a downfal, what a scandal, when it is discovered that our rir pietate graris has dabbled in bribery ! Colonial awe will give way to ridicule, and the grandsons of felons will hail a kinsman, and felons themselves at the duck will be ready to shake hands with their brother on the bench. It is of more consequence there than in this coun try. Here we just see how a man may be honest, and possibly good, even if he has had a hand in ' transactions.' In the colonies the rules of morality, if ruder, must be more emphatic. Bribery must be bribery, and rubbery must be robbery, to suit the colonial apprehensions." Notwithstanding, however, the eminent disqualifi cation of Mr. STONOR for the special function con fided to him, he was actually on his way to adminis ter justice at the antipodes when Mr. MooRE, in the House of Commons on Monday last, put a question which was answered by Mr. FREDERICK PEEL to the effect that Mr. SToNon was appointed "in respect of " his professional attainments and entire fitness to fill " the situation to which he had been recommended ;" and though the decision of the committee VMS not, at the time known to himself or the Duke of NEW CASTLE, yet " having had an opportunity of examin " ing the evidence," Sze., they "were not of opinion " it afibrded a sufficient ground for cancelling the " appointment." In the course of the debate which followed, various gentlemen, including the chairman of the committee who had made the report, expressed their dissent from Mr. PEEL'S inferences so distinctly and indignantly that on Thursday he was again obliged to rise in the House and state that his Grace the Duke of NEWCASTLE no longer recommended the confirmation of the appointment. Mr. PEEL ad mitted that a printed paper by Mr. STONOR, relative to the resolution of the committee, bad passed un heeded by himself or the clerk whose duty it was to inspect the testimonials. Again an unhappy clerk stands sponsor for the Inches, to call it by no worse name, of his political superior. To make no harsh inferences, until Mr. MoonE broughtthe matter before the House, the Colonial-office had not heard of the gross charges against Mr. SlioNon of Sligo election notoriety ! What becomes, then, of those superlative talents for administration of which the Peelites pre-eminently boast the possession ? They first appoint a man un fit to be a judge; they then defend his continuance upon the bench on their own responsibility ; but, frightened by the temper of the House of Commons, they cancel on Thursday what they commended on Monday ; and before the week is half over they seek to throw the burden of blame upon the clerk who omitted to examine the packet of testimonials! This occurs when we are threatened with Govern- 243 went by clerks on a scale to which we have been hitherto strangers. And the moral of the story remains as pointed by the Times in a leader of Friday, that Mr. STUNOR, " otherwise a worthy " gentleman, has been taught ; "that " the members " of the House are generally one as bad as another ; " but they are not all equally found out." Some of them, it is true, can participate in divisions on this very subject which they opportunely forget. But we can leave this story as it stands, without com ment. Both facts and moral are at the service of the pure Peelites. NUNS AND THEIR PROPERTY. Os Tuesday last Mr. WurrnsiDE moved for leave to bring in a bill to secure persons under the restraint of religious vows from the coercion of undue influence in the disposition or alienation of their property. Although the formal terms of the motion embrace all persons under religious restraint, he frankly con fessed that nuns were the particular class he had in view. Before the Reformation they were considered to be civilly dead, and incapable of performing any act which implied mental and corporal liberty ; and it is scarcely accordant with sound reason that they should enjoy more ample rights and privileges now, when England is Protestant, than were permitted to them when the Sovereign, the Parliament, and the great majority of the nation professed the Roman Catholic faith. Should Cardinals and Bishops of Birmingham and Beverley be enfranchised from fetters which the law imposes on British husbands? Married women in England are protected f►om the undue influence of their husbands in the alienation of property. It can only take place by an acknow ledgment, in the absence of the husband, before a commissioner appointed for the purpo,e. Again, equity prevents all pecuniary transactions between wards and guardians, trustees and cestuique trusts. Has the Lady Superior or the Lord Cardinal less influence over a nun than a husband over a wife, or a guardian over a ward ? The particular mode in which protection should be secured may be deter mined hereafter; meanwhile we rejoice that Mr. WIIITESIDE'S motion was carried by a large majority. I THE LATE JUSTICE TALFOURD. THERE perhaps was not on the bench a judge whose death will be so deeply and widely deplored as is that of the late Justice TALFULMD; for, though many of his brother judges are more profoundly versed in law, none of them has achieved excellence in so many different departments of mental labour. He was an accomplished critic, an orator, a poet, and a dramatist; in his profession he succeeded Lord CAMPBELL as leader of the Oxford circuit; in Parliament his measure of success was adequate to the efforts he made. His last speech in the Senate contained a noble image, which, coming from a consistent Liberal, may attract the attention of Liberals even though recorded in a Conservative journal. The particular occasion we do not remem ber, but it was in addressing himself to the question whether the basis of political power in England should be widened, that Sergeant TAISOURD, after a graceful reference to his persistent advocacy of popular rights, protested against a further extension of the franchise, comparing those whom it excludes from political power to "the Cyclops armed with " tremendous strength, blind and grovelling in the " darkness of ignorance !" By many classes the late judge will be held in affectionate reverence. The lover of general literature will remember the friend, critic, and biographer of ELIA ; among those to whom dramatic triumphs are epochs in history, the author of lon will be an object of " hero-worship ;" the student of classic lore will address himself with a fresher zeal to his laborious task when he recall the distinguished career of the pupil of Dr. VALPY ; the young aspirant for fame, earning his bread by the pen, will reflect that TALrounu may be added to that illustrious list which includes the names of JOHNSON, BURKE, SHEII., and CAMPBELL; while, amongst the candidates for forensic honours, not a few of the rising generation can speak of the ready hand, the cordial smile, the kindly word of en couragement which, coming from THOMAS NOON TALFOURD, will be treasured through a lifetime and recounted with pride in old age. On his promotion to the bench the members of the circuit of which he was long the leader and the ornament expressed their feelings after the English fashion by giving a dinner in honour of their former chief. At that dinner Justice TALFOURD said, and we doubt not with perfect sincerity, that he valued his promotion because it afforded a respite, gave some little time fur reflection between the contests and the turmoil of the crowded court and the grave, which from him could not be very remote. He Ilse I I