The Press.
London, England, 1854-02-18 00:00:00

unpaid subordinate, though leading the House
of Commons, cannot coerce a Cabinet. And,
if Lord Josh RUSSELL were pledged to any-
thing, it was to his own bill of '52. Why was
that unlucky failure not revived, if the pro-
mise of '5l be still binding? But, in fact,
this ground of defence has never been taken.
The agument is, that England needs reform,
and that a measure like that before Parlia-
ment was imperatively called for. Called for
by whom, and for what purpose? Have the
people of England spoken? No speeches—
no public meeting—no petitions—no eager
crowd surrounding Westminster-hall—the very
galleries of the House of Commons scarcely
filled—even of members a moderate attend-
anee--4 cold; languid curiosity pervading the
audience—an hour and a half of frigid state-
ment unrelieved by one animated sentence on
the speaker's part, or, at least, of cheering
from his hearers—eau this be the inauguration
of a reform so urgently demanded, for which
the country so thirsts, that it must be under-
taken amidst the embarkation of troops, and
the tumult of arms ? " But the measure is
necessary." No doubt it is so—necessary to
some persons and for some purposes. It is
necessary, after eighteen months of disputed
ascendancy in the Cabinet, to place beyond
doubt the humiliation of one section, and the
triumph of another. It is necessary that the
Whig territorial aristocracy should be taught
their place, and made to feel that, in the eyes
of their new allies, the profession of liberal
predilections does not atone for the offence
of possessing hereditary influence. It is ne-
cersary that an inseparable breach and an
insurmountable barrier should be placed be-
tween the Conservative party and those
statesmen who, though in office, yet retain a
lingering and half-avowed sympathy with
Conservative principles. It is necessary,
above all, if the warlike preparations which
we witness be in reality only a costly pre-
tence, if that unprecedented state of foreign
relations which Lord DERBY rightly described
as being neither war, nor peace, nor yet neu-
trality, is to terminate in a disgraceful com-
promise, such as Russia demands, and Turkey
dreads—that the public eye should be averted
from the ignominous catastrophe by the spec-
tacle of domestic dissension. With war in
Europe—war in the Cabinet—war between
labour and capital in the North—what was
wanting to complete the imbroglio except
a revival of the suspended struggle between
town and country?
But we hear it unblushingly put forward by
the agents of Lord ABERDEEN that the bill has
a Conservative tendency. Challenged to proof,
they point to that portion of it which professes
to give a representation to local minorities.
And certainly were this idea fairly carried out
it might produce the result anticipated. But
here, as elsewhere, a sound principle is ap-
plied to justify a party manoeuvre. For the
manifest effect of the plan, as intended to
operate, is to introduce Whig or Democratic
members into some twenty-five or thirty of
the counties, while, as a set-off, four or five
great towns only will return one Conservative
candidate a piece. We do not now criticise
details, else it might easily be shown that the
mode of voting adopted is equally novel,
•clumsy, and perplexing to the elector.
Let us consider the principle on which the
disfranchisement of old boroughs and the
creation of new seats is based. No problem
.of physical science is capable of more absolute
demonstration than that assertion so often
denounced as groundless, but never refuted—
that the representation of the land under the
present law is inadequate. The figures arc
before us, but we give only results. The Eng-
lish counties, with a population falling just
short of ten millions, return a hundred and
'forty-four members. The English boroughs,
•.with a population of seven millions, return
'three hundred and nineteen members. It is
true that the unrepresented towns are here
classed with the counties. But of these towns
:all which contain five thousand inhabitants
and upward have a collective population of
Jess than one million. Transferring these,
therefore, and leaving only to the counties
those villages and hamlets which really form
part of the rural districts, we have still a
purely agricultural population of nearly nine