The Press. — London, England, 1858-09-25 00:00:00

914 THE PRESS, SEPTEMBER 25, 1858. in managing their own business and dealing with matters of local interest—not in considering great measures of State policy, involving the well-being of the empire. Now, we have no wish that any of the classes whom we have here enumerated should be eli minated from the House of Commons—their pre sence there is most useful and desirable; but then we do not wish to see there an undue proportion of any. We do not, therefore, wish to see an undme proportion of country gentlemen, or of those returned under the influence of large proprietors or large capitalists, or of place men under the control of the Crown. We shall assuredly have a very imperfect legis lative assembly whenever any particular classes greatly preponderate over the others; for, if we cannot get all classes in the community duly balanced in the representation, we shall have class legislation, an evil against which your Reformers make the loudest outcry. - Now, we suppose that the most active agitators for Reform will not dare to avow that their ob ject, when they ask to re-form the House of Commons, is nut to improve it. We call, then, upon them to bear in mind that the House of Com mons is to be improved. We call upon them never to lose sight of this fact; and when they assert that such and such a set of men have a claim or a right to the elective franchise, on account of the peculiar virtues which they may possess, we must assert, on the other hand, that they ought to have this additional virtue before it can be said that they have any such claim or right—viz., that they are men who will return as their mem bers the kind of men who are wanted in the House to deal with the vast and important affairs of this great empire. We wish, therefore, our countrymen to study the nature of the qualifica tions which ought to be possessed by those who compose the most powerful estate of the realm. We wish them to remember that Government is not a matter of mere will, and fancy, and incli nation, but that on every question there is a right way and a wrong way, and that the all-important object is to collect in one assembly a body of men who will be most likely not only to discover the right way, but to follow it. As an example of our meaning, let us take the Atlantic Telegraph Company. The task to be performed is to lay the cable : for this end there should be a selection of persons to conduct the enterprize. Now, if the selection were placed in the hands of persons guided by personal interests and inclinations, who would select this man because he was a pleasant companion, and that because he had many shares, and another because he could make a speech, and so on, neglecting those endowed with science, knowledge, and ex perience, who had devoted the best energies of their lives to considering these kind of operations, what reasonable prospect would there have been that the mighty enterprize would have been brought to a successful termination ? If then, the electors had been influenced by the unwise motives in their choice instead of the wise ones—and if in consequence the enterprize had failed—of what avail would it be to say, " Well, the electors were all shareholders, and they had a right to choose the Directors "? Very true, but if they did not know better how to exercise their right it would have been far better for themselves had they never possessed it. In constructing, therefore, Parliamentary con stituencies, the grand principle which ought to be kept in view is, that they should be constituted on the special ground that they are likely to return men whose presence is wanted in the Legislature. The point to be aimed at in their construction ought to be, not to form what may appear to be good constituencies, based on the claims of those who may compose them, but to create constituencies, of VARIOUS kinds, who are likely to return members with different qualifi cations and different characters, subject to dif ferent influences, forming together one homo geneous whole ; the talents of each being brought to bear, according as each may excel, in dis cussing and conducting the various affairs sub mitted to their consideration. What, then, is required is to construct a Legis lature which will conduct in the wisest and safest manner the affairs of the empire. If this object can be obtained more effectually by constructing constituencies with '20,000 voters in each, than by constructing constituencies with twenty voters in each, the larger number ought to be adopted, and vice-versa ; the paramount lto construct a Legislature which wi l est being best adr a i. nister public affairs. But in the proposal s o f Radical Reformers this object is generally lost sight of. They would seem to prefer enfranchising the whole male adult population, even were there a positive certainty that such enfranchise ment would produce the worst possible Legis. lature, rather than restrict it to a tew, even were there a positive certainty that the so doing would produce the best. They seem to say, "Give us the constituencies we ask for, and what sort of a Legislature they will create is a matter we will not take into our consideration. Now, we submit that this principle, if fully carried out, would be fatal to our national prosperity, perhaps existence. We well know that a House of Commons, into the election of which the popular element should not very largely enter, would be a very imperfect and dangerous machine ; but of this we feel equally sure, that a House of Commons, elected exclu sively by large and populous constituencies, would be still more imperfect and far more dan gerous. In dealing, therefore, with Reform, we ask of the Radical Reformers that we should come to a fair understanding on the object to be aimed at. We invite Mr. BRIGHT and his party to give us a direct answer upon this point. If they say we will only deal with the claims of the people and will exclude from our consideration all that may result therefrom, then we cannot even argue with them, because we have nothing in common with them, and we can only, therefore, give to their schemes and their pretensions the most uncom promising resistance in our power. But, if they say we desire by our Reforms to improve, then are we ready to enter the lists with them and fairly to argue out with them this question : Are your Reforms calculated to improve the character of the Legislature, or, are they not calculated to deteriorate it and render it less fit and less able to manage the vast and complicated interests of this great empire ? THE TYRANNY OF JOURNALISM. WE had thought that the nonsense about the agricultural mind and the quarter-sessions states men, which at one time was a much-used and not ineffective property of the players upon the political stage, had been thrown by among other rubbish, and that, after passing through the various phases of a downward progress, it had ceased to be thought worthy of being kept in stock even by the most hackneyed of platform orators. We were, however, it seems, mistaken. The tendency to return to old conceptions, which is so remarkable among our artistic decorators, is shared by our political writers, and the journal which has been termed the leading journal of Europe, and which arrogates to itself the func tion equally of dictating to nations their policy. and to private individuals the modes of employ ing each of the twenty-four hours of their daily life,—the journal which assumes to be a monopo list of progress, has been the first to set the example of retrogression. The Times has thought it worth while to fall back upon those worn-out forms of expression, and to pick up for its own use the rags that have fallen from the ruins of the old League platforms. The terms of the Chinese Treaty are not coin• inunicated quite so quickly after its conclusion as the Times thinks they ought to be. Lord DEltl3l" does not dispose of his horses in the manner the Times deems proper. Mr. HENLEY and , . Mr. NEWDEGATF: make speeches which the limeer feels knock a weapon of offence out of their hands and the Times feels conseque ntl y every disposition to say something extremely an strong, and damaging of all these gentlemen, d ot government by a Conservative party. They see, too, they think, in these occurrences and in the life and death of an eminent country gentleman, an opportunityreostfagbelistthinigagaantehrwutshte aotldthweretebernt.toweeriaill agriculture and commerce, between town and country. To this occupation the Times bal shall ultimately lead to it, appear to us to go upon not only a false principle, but one which, if analyzed, contradicts itself. The question at issue is, " Who are to be the rulers of this nation ? " Now, if there are rulers, there must be those who are to be ruled ; when there are none to be ruled, but when each sets up as a ruler, anarchy is established, and the nearer the approximation to the rule of all, the nearer is the approach to anarchy. Now, in civilized and densely-peopled communities, we believe that this state of things is an impossibility. So long as masses of human beings congregate together, so long it will ever be that the few will rule and the many will obey. This is in the nature of things, and man may as well try to annihilate the law of gravity as to fight against this in evitable law. When, therefore, flatterers try to persuade the people that they can really govern, they practise on their credulity: by changing the character of our institutions no doubt a change may be effected in the character of our rulers, but there will still be the rulers and the ruled. And what we wish our friends of the working classes to remember is, that their numbers are so great that they cannot themselves all rule ; and what we wish them to consider is, whether they will really be gainers by the c hange which is suggested to them. We would also ask them whether their own experience does not coincide with the lesson that British history teaches, that their real friends—those who sympathize the most with their wants and their wishes, and who have done the most to ameliorate their physical and moral condition—have more frequently been found amongst men of independent fortune, of liberal education, and of high rank, than amongst those who are or have been toiling for their live lihood, and whose minds are narrowed by the ne cessity and the habit of paying great attention to pecuniary matters ? These are men who, having been obliged to fight their way in the world, naturally turn their especial attention to their own advancement in life. We do not say that small means and pure love of country cannot co exist ; we know to the contrary ; we could pro duce brilliant examples of the union ; but of this we arc very sure, that, generally speaking, nothing is a more powerful damper on the spirit of sufficient independence to prevent sinister con siderations as to what will affect his pecuniary interests jostling with his own genuine political opinions. - Now, one of the effects resulting from the Reform Act of 1832 has been to bring into the House of Commons a large body of men, who have grown grey in being the architects of their own fortunes ; men who would never care to enter within its walls, if they did not hope, by means of the position in society which the title of M.P. confers, to add an additional story to the pecuniary edifice which they have spent their life in rearing. These are the men whose names figure at the head of joint-stock companies of all kinds, because a certain number of names, with the initials M.P. attached to them, is thought essential to success by the promoters of these speculations. Many of these men are to be found on Parliamentary railway committees, to which post considerable influence is attached, so that, without any positive corruption, a member, sitting on a railway committee, finds, somehow or another, a great many individuals who derive much pleasure and satisfaction from doing him some accidental service which is likely to prove agreeable or beneficial. Then, again, look at the enormous number of lawyers in the House. Arc the constituencies so innocent as to suppose that these men seek seats in the House, in order to dedicate their time to the service of their country ? Why, were they so to do, they must abandon the practice of the profession by which they live. What, then, are the motives which really influence the majority of them when they spend their time and money in order to get a seat ? Generally speaking (and it is very natural) they seek to become M.P.'s because thereby profes sional advancement is obtained. How many are there now in fair practice who would never have been so placed if it had not been for the prestige which surrounds an .M.P., and for the iVlueuce which a legislator possesses ? Then, again, look at the number of men of business returned who have obtained local noto riety—men justly, perhaps, deserving of the esteem and confidence of their fellow-citizens-- bnt men who have lived more than halfa century