The Press.
London, England, 1857-04-04 00:00:00

JoNes, and the late Sir W. MOLESWORTH belong
to the latter school ; we are glad to see that
Lord JO►►N RUSSELL has now by his own words
avowed himself a member of the former.
In all other respects Lord Jons's programme
is identical with that of the Conservatives.
Peace and economy represent his policy, as
much as they do Mr. DIsRAELI's. While as to
improvement, none can say that the Conser-
vatives are averse to the principle, when we
recollect all that was done by Lord DERBY'S
Government in 1852, and the strong array of en-
lightened statesmen which the party presents
now. M Hell has been said of Lord PALMERSTON'S
Conservatism, and it is probable that his
s►mpathies may lie in that direction. But a
statesman who steers so habitually—arbitrio
popularis aura—can never be trusted for a
►uonth together. In '55 he voted against Sir
W. CLAY'S hill, and in 1856 in its favour. That
one year could have made no difference in the
principle. He is now the Minister of war and
war taxes; so that, even on Lord JOHN'S
showing, he is as little a representative of
Liberal as of Conservative principles.
Yet Lord JOHN declares he will support
him in preference to Lord DERBY. After
having given a definition of his own prin-
ciples, which contains nothing contrary to
those of Lord DERBY, ho declares himself the
follower of a statesman who has no principles
at all. Lord DERBY ►night answer very well
the purpose which Lord Jous RUSSELL pro-
fesses, but then he would not exactly benefit
the connection which Lord JOHN RUSSELL
hopes he may again live to lead. Is this the
solution of the seeming inconsistency? If not,
will his Lordship solve it for us himself?

THE METROPOLITAN CO NSTI.
TUENCIES.
WE think that any one who studies the
history of the metropolitan boroughs must be
convinced that large electoral districts are not
best suited for obtaining efficient representa-
tives. Few can venture to face such consti-
tuencies without a positive Radical popularity,
and the personal toil imposed on the chosen
representative is enormous. Even the ean•
vassing for the post, with its three meetings
per diem, and its parochial committees to be
visited, imposes much labour. Profuse ex-
penditure, personal fatigue, the risk of failure,
the possibility of not being again elected,
deter several qualified gentlemen from risking
money, health, and time upon such exceed-
ingly onerous and not very glorious toils.
There are hundreds of British gentlemen,
with stout English hearts, who, in the proper
time and place, would die for their country.
But men of the purest and most ardent
patriotism might well be excused if they shrink
from the vulgar clamour and reckless expen-
diture of a great metropolitan constituency.
In saying so much we are not echoing any
special Conservative views. We are only
stating the conclusions of common sense upon
matters of fact. On last Sunday a Ministerial
organ assailed the metropolitan constituencies
in a style calculated to please the most
inveterate enemy of further reform. After
enumerating all the acts by which metro-
politan candidates are fleeced, it is stated :
This system may not come under the exact literal mean-
ing of bribery, but in spirit it is so.
By "the system" is meant the plan of paid
canvassers, pu'alic-houses opened for " treat-
ing " under the name of committee-rooms, and,
as if that were not bad enough, there is a new
plan of paying the electors also as can-
vassers. The public mind ignorantly sup-
poses that by " paid canvassers" is only meant
a number of stipendiaries to go round the
borough end press the claims of the candidate.
Such a system has always prevailed more or
less. But there is another class who act
nominally only as " canvassers," bat who are
really paid for their rotes and " cheers." In
place of going round the streets and soliciting
votes, these electoral worthies get drunk in
the public-houses at the expense of the
" honourable gentleman of Liberal principles,"
and are handsomely paid for doing so.