The Press. — London, England, 1853-07-23 00:00:00

t ' No. 12.—VoL. I. gte ress. LONDON, SATURDAY, JULY :13, 1t453. WHATEVER hesitation there may be on the part of our Government to look upon the invasion of Turkey as a «mu belli, no one can justly accuse them of the same delicacy when our own internal interests are concerned. The Coalition have at least declared war against 1 the British Constitution. In the whole his tory of our polities there is nothing more pro fligate than the position which has been taken up on this subject by Lord ABERDEEN and his colleagues. According to her Majesty's Ministers a mea sure of Parliamentary Reform is required. Such a necessity was proclaimed more than two years ago by Lord JOHN RUSSELL, and the matter was considered so urgent that at the beginning of '52 he introduced a bill for the purpose. That fanatical Reformer, Sir JAMES GRAHAM, feels so strongly on the subject, that when the Government of Lord ABERDEEN was arranged he made Parliamentary Reform on a "lame' scale the condition of his joining the Administration. The high-principled Prime Minister at once assented to the stipulation, while his ingenuous Chancellor of the Exche quer, Mr. GLADSTONE, was privately canvassing for votes among the supporters of Lord DERBY, with reiterated assurances that the Ministry of Lord ABERDEEN was "strictly Conservative.' Parliament is about to be prorogued, after a long session, and not a single intimation of the principles on which the House of Com mons is to be reconstructed has been afforded us by the ardent Reformers and the enthusi astic Conservatives who combine to carry on the Queen's Government. If urgent, why is this measure of State ne cessity postponed? If not importunate, or if not required, why are such agitating pur poses announced ? And why, of all per►son►s in the world, are the public disturbers the Queen's Ministers ? We are told daily that the country was never so prosperous, and that its pros perity is solely attributable to the wise legisla tion of Parliament. Then what need to recon struct Parliament, which has evinced a spirit so prescient and so beneficial ? The fact is, and it is known to every one, that Parlhunentary Reform was a device of Lord JOHN RUSSELL and Sir JAMES GRAHAM to clip the power of the landed interest, because the country gentlemen resented that violent and abrupt change in our commercial system which was factiously suggested by Lord .Tons in November, '45, and mainly earried into effect in the course of the next year, by the craven treachery of the Member li►r Without Parliamentary Reform, Sir .IARES GRAHAM did not well see how he could ever again become a Minister; and his tactics being a little disturbed by the sudden resignation of Lord DERBY, whom the confederates of Woburn Abbey did not intend to repel from power until the spring, Sir JAMES recklessly rushed LONDON, SATURDAY, JULY 23, 1853. to a position which he will not be able to maintain, and, in order to establish the Coali tion Ministry by the united aid of the Radical members, came out as a " large " Reformer though, in truth. he has not settled a single principle, large or small, on which his pro jected measure is to be founded. Does Sir JAMES GRAHAM wish to destroy that balance between the rural and the urban con stituencies which he assisted Lord Caixv in 1830 to establish ? And, if so, why so ? Will he, for example, advanee the plea that there has been so considerable an increase in the population of the towns since the Reform Act, that the disproportion between population and political power is preposterous*."lhe sum mary of the recent census proves that counting as the country districts only such as contain single houses, villages, and towns which have no markets, and which, in fact, are merely vil lages of a larger growth, the population of Great Britain may now be looked upon as equally divided between rural and urban in habitants. Yet three-fifths of the members of the House of Cohnnons for (heat Britain are already members for towns ! But then it is urged that it is indefensible that Manchester, with 300,000 inhabitants, should be repre sented only by the same number of members as Thetford, with four or five thousand. But is it more indefensible than that Macclesfield and Stockport, the two great townie of North Cheshire, with an united population of 03,000, should be represented by four mem bers ; while North Cheshire itself, with a popu lation nearly double that amount, should be represented by only two members :".rake again South Cheshire : there is only one town in it. Chester, with 18,000 inhabitants, has two members ; the county, with iB,OOO in habitants, has the same number ! I f popula tion 6nly is to be adopted its the test of the propriety of electoral arraisgemelits, we under take to adduce anomalies far more striking and more numerous with regard to the country than are so loudly and so frequently alleged with reference to the town constituencies. But we will not admit that population is the only, or the main, eonmideration in the distri bution of political power. We hold that, in a constitutional monarchy like England, the principal depository of power should be the land. All our institutions, ecclesiastical and civil, rest upon it. The largest section of the middle class, the greatest employers of labour, are occupied in its cultivation. The only basis of a free and genuine aristocracy is to he found in its possession. Upon the mainte nance of styli an aristocniey, 114 continually by the necumulated wealth and distinguished abilities of the ecaumuiiity, an aristocracy maintained, indeed, by absorbing all aristo envies, the existence of freedom in a Euro pean country appears to us to depend. No country can subsist as a first-rate power that is not sustained and animated by a principle. The despotic principle upholds, 111141 organises, and directs the colossal resources of Russia ; democracy inspires the United States. Both principles are adminibly and completely adapted to the circumstances with which they have to deal—the men. the country, and the ronditions of their eivilisation. The principle of aristocraey has made England a country of the highest class. We owe to it our freedom, our order, our pure religion ; we owe to it even that wealth which we are ashamed to admit is valued in these days by some even PRICE SIXPENCE. beyond freedom and faith. Po not let us be hew that these blessings will long remain in a society whit+ repudiates the principle to which it owes its existence. That eau never be. The life of cautions is like tho life of man ; and the country which abjures the element that has formed its laws, its manners, its cus toms, that has ereated its traditions, and given a colour to its future,—is a corpse. THE ASSASSINATIONS AT SMYRNA. Ova rooters have probably seen an account in the papers of last week of the arrest and detention of a Hungarian rebel by thu Austrian authorities in the city of Smyrne, and the subsequent interference in behalf sof the prisoner by this American Consul, and the commander of an Amerieatt vessel-of•war iu the harbour. This HUlig/Irian, whose name is KOKI4TA, it scents, had beets libellaell with the other refugees of his country, and permitted to retire to America, under the promise of nut again returning to the Turkish dominions. in spite of this s thiinsyreutitig:ignen Niselnitehltitiittytihtt:lwaAsinseetii seized rbey tunsed to Asia Minor, stud lived for some time the crew of an Austrian brig and removed to the vessel for the purpose of being carried back into Austria. The American Consul claimed hint as a citizen of the United States. but. when examined by the authorities of that nation he distinctly denied his Ameriean citizenship, and with it Al claim to American protection, declaring that he was not provided with an American passport, and Openly avow ing his country, and his resolution to live suit! die a Hungarian. In spite of this distinct disclaimer of Ameriean citizenship, the Ameri • can Consul still claimed him ; and this Ameri can captain actually laid his vessel alongside the Austrian sloop with the avowed purpose of preventing her departure with the Hungarian captive. The Austrian Intermmeio at Con stantinople, to whom the Turkish Governor referred the matter, justified the arrest of an Austrian criminal in the Turkish dominions as being strictly conformable to existing treaties, and asserted the right of his Sovereign to claim his own subject.. Upon the abstract justice sit this claim we cannot pronounce without a careful examination of the article in the treaty Of extradition upon which it is based. Thu manner of the arrest, supposing it to have been elwreetly reported, was undoubtedly birth irregular and illegal ; but, we think the violence of the American Consul in pronouncing judg ment in Isis own favour, and immediately Inking the law into his own hand and executing it, require:: a protest from every Sovereign in Europe who wishes to preserve his indepen dence and to mai iota in what little yet remains of international law. If American citizenship and an American isississl secure impunity to all rebels, it is clear the crime of high treason must he erased from the code of every country. If this doc trine prevails, what should prevent KOSSUTH himself or M.IZZ I NI from returning into Austria and Italy, armed with this talisman, and defy ing the Sovereign and the police. and invoking 77 ~..,