The Press.
London, England, 1858-01-09 00:00:00

26

which has been brandished before Parliament
for the last ten yea's, and which disturbs the
consideration of other grave social and politi-
cal problems that await solution.
That the Conservative body and the landed
interest are treated unfairly by the present
system, seems to have been admitted by the
Cabinet of Lord ASIRDIEN. That Ministry
was composed both of statesmen who had
opposed and of those who had supported the
Bill of 1832. They knew what had been done
by the Grey Cabinet. By the Bill of 1832, one
hundred and forty-twomembcrs had been with-
drawn from boroughs previously sending repre-
sentatives, and of those boroughs a vast number
belonged to the Conservative connection. [Any
reader who may desire to see the statistics on
this special point, and on others in this impor-
tant subject, will find them most luminously
arranged in Mr. NEWMARCH'S valuable essay,
read before the "Statistical Society" in June,
1857.]
What, then, did the Coalition Cabinet pro-
pose in 1854? By the scheme which was
introduced in that year (and over whose with-
drawal Lord Jon% RUSSELL shed tears) it was
suggested to withdraw 62 members from
boroughs previously sending representatives—
viz., 29 members from boroughs wholly to be
disfranchised, and 33 members, by reducing
from two members to one the representation
of 33 boroughs ; and to these 62 seats were
added the four vacant for Sudbury and St.
Albans. Of these total 66 seats so obtained
roaxv-sra were assigned by the scheme of 1854
to COUNTIES, and seventeen to boroughs !
That fact must not be forgotten ; and it is
of great importance that its signifieduce should
be clearly understood. The " Coalition" was no
friend to the Conservative body ; and yet it pro-
posed that the number of members for the coun-
ties should be increased by forty-six seats. Could
any testimony be stronger to what the late
Mr. CROKER called "the uni-lateral character"

of the measure of 1829? Even the Aberdeen-
Russell Cabinet thought that something should
be done to redress the balance between the
two great parties in the country.
So that when the Times of Thursday speaks
of "further increasing the county franchise "
and of " the watchfulness of party," and when
the Queen's Speech lately announced a measure
" for regulating the franchise," we are fully jus-
tified in directing the " vigilance " of the Con-
servative mind to the serious consideration
that it may be quite possible for the Premier
to introduce a measure which will diminish
the Conservative influence in the counties,
without giving them any equivalent advantages
in the boroughs. Instead of adding " forty-six"
members to the agricultural interest, the Pre-
mier's bill, aided by the dexterous manipula-
tion of the Reform Club, may have the effect
of subtracting that number from the Con-
servative interest. When these points arc
observed and learned, we do not think that
any intelligent Conservative will say that all
discussion of Reform is "premature.
Nor would it be safe or wise to deride as
" visionaries " the motley gathering of Radi-
cals who follow at the heels of Mr. BEaseLEy.

Their scheme may be briefly designated as a
sort of rose-water Chartism, but it would be
shortsighted to scoff at the action of the oar-
ties who endorse it. Their body may yet be
used by Mr. HATrxre as a corps of reserve, and
while disclaiming their principles, that veteran
fictionist may organise their influence, and
teach them how to raise a cry for " the (Pal-
" merston) Bill, the whole Bill, and nothing
"but the Bill." What happened in 1831 must
not occur again. A Whig measure was pro-
pounded in the spring of that year, and the
Radicals shouted fox• it with ulterior purposes;
and it was only by strenuous efforts, and an
immense expenditure of tune and energy, that
the Conservatives defended the Constitution
Let the Conservatives now recollect that by

the working of the Bill of Lord GREYS
Cabinet an ascendancy of two to one was
organised in favour of Liberalism in the towns
and boroughs ; that by the unforeseen and un-
calculated influence of Parliamentary changes

a prodigious electoral superiority was given
in Ireland to the Roman Catholic body ; that
in Scotland " Reform" has been worked in a
moat one-sided way ;that in the changes of
183'2 an immense number of seats was taken