The Express.
London, England, 1848-06-29 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, 'I lIIIRSDAY ETENING, JUNE 29, 1848.

prepared to support triennial parliaments, vote by 1
ballot, and bousetold suffrage' he could not in con-
science
support the equalisation of electoral districts. Of
moat of the broad, leading outlines of Mr. Hume's
plan of electoral reform Lord NUGENT approves, but
because his lordship doubts as to one of its 'Foie
provisions, he will not even vote for going into com-
mittee upon it. Priority of publication equally with
priority of invention establish( s a claim to a patent
for any new device, and therefore this one may be
called the Nugent dodge.
There is rod reason to believe that more than one
of our soi-disant liberal members contemplate availing
themselves of this evasion. On Friday evening—or
at all events inafter.explanations with their constitn-

sots—we shall find a number of these gentlemen
demonstrating that they have voted against further
reform, simply because of their excessive attachment
to reform. One will profess to have had his spiced
conscience revolted by one item of Mr. lints's pro-
gramme—another by another. Lord NUGENT dis-
approves of more equal electoral districts, because
that would be to introduce a new principle into our
electoral system ; another reforming member will fly
off because he thinks the ballot un-English; a third
will be unable conscientiously to support any-
thing short of manhood suffrage ; and a
fourth will stand out for four-years' or
two-years' parliaments as the case may be.
And already the ministerial press is bring-
ing up its heavy artillery to cover the retreat of these
shuffiers by opening a fire upon Mr. HUMS for
shaping his motion so as to insure for it the minimum
of support. It is already rating Mr. HUMP, for not
confining himself to one or other head of his plan at a
time.

A plain straightforward statement of facts is all
that is required to put these querulous subterfuges
down. It is an indispensable requisite in any plan of
electoral reform, deserving the name, that it ee:all be
obviously adequate to effect a real change in our
present system. To enable it to obtain the
popular support required for success, this is
necessary : the people will not give them-
selves tho trouble to support a measure not fitted
to produce any perceptible result. And more than
this, tolbring forward a sham measure of reform—a
measure which would appear to extend popular in-
fluence without doing so in reality—would be dis-
graceful to those who undertake it ; would be a rank
case of political swindling. It has therefore been in-
cumbent upon Mr. Hume, both as a politic leader and
an honest man, so to shape his plan that it shall strike
at all those notorious and recognised influences which
render the House of Commons a merely nominal and
illusory representation of the people.
Now what arc the influences having this tendency
that are publicly recognised as such by alt earnest
reformers? lu the first place it is allowed that a
seven years' lease of a seat in parliament is quite as
efficacious as a life-lease in making members oblivious
of their responsibility during the greater part of their
term. It is trifling with men of common sense to
say that, de fercto, tew parliaments last seven years.
The power of shortening or lengthening them is
vested in the minister for the time being, and this
enables him to hold a dissolution in terrorem over
such members as, counting upon a seven years' lease
of power, have at any time yielded to his blandish-
ments. The uncertain duration of parliaments is an
element of strength for a corrupt or imbecile ministry.
In the second place it is allowed that open
voting enables the wealthy and powerful to
compel electors by intimidation, or to induce
them by more insidious arts to vote against
their consciences. In the third place it is admitted
that the ten-pound qualification, except in a few rare
exceptional cases, excludes from the franchise even
those of the working classes whose superior intelli-
gence and independent position enable them to exer-
cise it with benefit, both to their own order and the
community at largo. And it is only in towns that there
is even a ten pound franchise. Lastly, it is confessed
that the small constituencies arc mere tools in the
hands of the great landowners and the moneyed
aristocracy, the former holding the lion's share. So
glaring is this fact, that to save appearances, a bill
has been brought into parliament to promote the re-
formation of the few constituencies of this class whose
conduct has been scrutinised since the last election;
and it is not asserted that these doomed cone' ituencies
are one jot worse than their fellows. The only diffe-
rence between them is that the contemplated victims
of the bill have been caught in the fact, and that all the
others have as yet escaped exposure. The influences
which enable the holy alliance of the titled and un-
titled aristocracy—the class for which Lord JOHN
RUSSELL claims a monopoly of administrative ap-
po'ntments—to pack the House of Commons by en
suring the return of a majority composed of them-
selves and their dependants, are—the uncertain and
possibly long duration of parliaments, the publicity of
voting, the exclusion of a numerous class of intelligent
and independent individuals from participation in the
franchise, and the vesting in a number of small and
easily corrupted constituencies the power of returning
a numerical majority of members to the House of
Commons.

It was necessary for Mr. HUME to strike at all
these abuses in his plan of reform, unless he was
willing to present himself to the public in the cha-
racter of a juggler who cheats men's eyes with a
show of doing what is not done, or of an incapable
leader who exerts himself to carry a measure which
he ought to know nobody will trouble themselves to
aid him in carrying. The charge against Mr. Huts,
therefore, that his motion embraces too many details,
amounts simply to this—that it is too efficacious.
'I he practisers of the Nugent dodge in parliament, and
its promoters in the press, disapprove of Mr. ACME'S
measure simply because it is too real—too likely to
be efficacious to serve their purposes.
Mr. HUNIE'B motion embraces no perfect theory
of representation, but a practical measure of re-
form, calculated to correct acknowledged abuses.
Our small constituencies are mere nomination
boroughs; a valuable and honest portion of
the community are excluded from the exercise
of the franchise; the poor and honest voter is
exposed alternately to irresistible temptations and
to the vengeance of the offended great; and selfish
politicians who contrive to slip into parliament are
emancipated from the sense of responsibility. An elec-
toral system, framed in the main upon Mr. lIUME'i
model, would largely increase the number of electors,
admitting an influential number of those classes who at
present are excluded; would do away with these hole-
and-corner constituencies, which are the main prop of
the bureaucratic oligarchy; would enable every man to
vote in safety, according to his conscience; and would
leave members of parliament no time to forget what
they owe to their constituents, and what will be the
consequence of abusing their delegated trust.
The vote on Friday evening will, therefore, be
simply a declaration on the part of each member
voting, either that he wishes the House of Commons
to remain constituted as it is, or that he wishes it to
be reformed. There is no room left for paltering or
equivocation. Members must either vote as reformers
or as anti-reformers, for the people or against them.
The Nugent dodge will deceive nobody.

WE wish to direct the attention of lay members of
the church to an audacious attempt to reintroduce
the principle involved in the Test Act into an im-
portant division of our educational institutions. That
act which, as our readers know, rendered it impera-
tive on various state functionaries to receive the
Sacrament, was repealed some years back, upon good
and solid grounds. As is inevitably the case when-
ever a useful reform takes place, the temporary oppo-
nents of the measure soon acquiesced in its pro-
priety. It is now acknowledged on all hands that
the effect of that act was to exclude conscientious
objectors to the Sacrament, and admit the urcon-
scientious or the profane. Now, the principle of
the sacramental test is again proposed to be
applied to the committees of management of
church schools. The Bishop of EXETER, backed
by an active party in the church, is endeavouring to
persuade churchmen that there is no guarantee for the
due education of the children in church schools unless

the managers are regular communicants. We quote
hie lordship's own words:
Let some plain common sense rule be adopted, that no one
shall belong to the committee who is net a regular commu-
nicant, or who at any time joins in worship with any sett.
Now, the question to be mooted by churchmen is
this: if this role is to be made absolute, into whose
hands will the m,inagement of church schools fall ?
The objections to the old sacramental test were
that a great number of conscientious members
of the Church of England never communicated, never
received the sacrameo. influenced by conscientious
e
whet,
scruples ; that
her nonconfself-styormists or iled
efidelbes, did noth entertain
Etteh scruples, aad that C013111L16241-i4PlaaintenaliCe

of the tot was in reality • oontraventien of the
very principle which the test itself was intro-
duced to uphold. We wish to know what the
Biehos
uelme to warrantxwrencandihisooirveri;
proposing in the
ing altered statere-ed n•
of the
troduce the test. No opposition is offered to " church
schools being placed under church management.'
In spite of all the outcry against the government, we
are persuaded that the Committee of Council is
williog to recognise this maxim in its fullest extent
have never once shrunk from recognising it.
The bishop himself acknowledges that the qualifica-
tion of every member of a school committee is that he
shall declare himself to be a band fide member of
the Church of England; and the proper authorities
have declared that it is the intention of the Privy
Council that this requireff church-membership shall be
subjected,if necessary, to proof. The bisho2 says that
there is no proof of church-membership bit participa-
tion in the sacrament. We again ask, it ...its was no
proof formerly, why is it a proof now ? Is the pro-
portionof communicants to non•communicants greater
now than at the time of the repeal of the Test Act ?
Is the criterion of their sincerity more certain? Both
these questions ought to be answered in the affirmative,
before the church can consent to entertain the
proposal of the bishop, and then it will be necessary
and proper to moot the question : is the required
qualification necessary, sufficient, or expedient? Into
whose hands, then, we repeat, will the management
of the church schools fall, should the rule of the
Bishop of EIETER be made absolute ? Is it into such
hands that the church—meaning not only the commu-
nicants .but the whole body of professing member's—
will feel secure that its interests will be properly
cared for? We are asking a question which it
behoves the clergy to answer: do the commu•
nicants represent adequately the church as it
exists in England ? Taking it for granted that
every communicant is a truo and sincere son of the
church ; making no deductions for the insincere, the
formal, the superstitious, the interested ; taking into
the account the gross number of communicants of
both sexes and of all ages ; can any right-thinking
man assert that this number is to bo called a true and
proper exponent of the church of England ? Look into
the greater number of our metropolitan churches, and
you will find scarcely a congregation, scarcely any com-
municants. Look into the remainder, which, either from
the influence of local circumstances or the powers of
popular preachers, are filled, and you will find that
the proportion of communicants to the congregation
is exceedingly small. Will it be said that one in
twenty of London's congregations communicates
regularly? We think not. Now, we are merely stating
facts, we are not considering whether the condition
which these facts represent is right and proper. We
limit ourselves to the assertion that the communicants
of the church of England can be said to represent the
whole church with no more propriety than that the
said church represents the united religious feeling of
the nation. It is time to speak plainly : the whole
church is not represented by the communicants. We
make the statement subject to correction, but we do
think that out of a congregation of ono hundred
taken at random through the country, it will be found
not more than five communicate. The church of
England is a larger, a more intelligent, a more im-
portant body than that which is represented by the
communicants only. Why this is so, it is the busi•
nese of the clergy to explain. There is a large clefs
of (pacel'iiturorrs) bon, fide members of the church
of England who, impressed with deep 'attachment to
the church of their fathers, imbued with profoundly
religious feelings, animated bye sincere love for ortho-
doxy and dislike for dissent, are still unable to pre-
vail upon themselves to receive the sacrament
These persons form the large majority of the Church
of England. The fact has been acknowledged in ser-
mons, in bishops' charges, in polemical pamphlets.
Are these persons to be told, then, that they are outof
the church? Are they to be refused permission to
interfere in the most important of the concerns of the
church ? Have they not a right to ask the reasons of
their disqualification ? And if the reply is that this
disqualification consists in their non•reception of the
sacrament, have they not again a right to ask why
they have not been as yet fully instructed in the pro-
priety and necessity of taking the sacrament ? Far
be it from us to moot theological questions in the
columns of a newspaper; we only enter a protest
against the right of any church to impose as a test
of true churchmanship the performance of a rite
which it has not been able to persuade nineteen-
twentieths of its members to participate in.
One word as to the charge of the bishop :
We must be allowed to express an opinion that its
delivery was a rather unseemly episcopal exhibition.
The bishop, listening to nothing but the old polemical
impulse, comes into the field as a stout theological
pugilist. Instead of correcting the proof sheets of an
cighteenpenny ramplilet in the back parlour of a
religious bookseller, he tuck' up his lawn sleeves,
and throws himself into a boxing attitude in
the episcopal throne. For the first time since the
days when " I'ulpit drum ecclesiastic was beat with
fist instead of a stick," we have had a cathedral turned
into a place of contest. We think it hard that the
clergy of the bishop's diocese should be obliged to ex-
pend time and money away from their own parishes
for the sakeof listening to tho manuscript of a contro-
versial pamphlet