The Express.
London, England, 1851-10-20 00:00:00

Ithr CrorrOls•

COII,I:ErONS.ENTS.
A WY. FAlt!oo •!.° The Lore.," ersolsoio rarr.e eveigsf•
re," V pu/Siebell toe!! as.l Ito Jay cglet. ie tioie
be pOst.
Adveo EarlatA Ist en.tni rat "The ENcre.....toofta 7,45!50 paper,
ass, ••• 4: estco, I• Bosocra•icreet, 47 Ise u'ktocli os Ida
day d! I t.O.scabuo.

HIGH WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE.
Tat% LiAT-11nrattg. 9^ 111, Atemovs. I,IJ. 2,es.
Te.u..taalr—ilonno,, lit. 3.a.

LONDON, MONDAY, OCTOBER 20.

Tilt tone and manner of Mr. late speech
at Edinburgh on the subject of parliamentary re-
form are such as deserve the thanks of all liberal
politicians. This old and steady friend of reform I
carefully avoids everything that can be considered
hash dogmatism; with all his experience, he is
ready to listen to new suggestions, and propounds a ;
plan full of alternatives. He is not wedded to any peen- 1
liar scheme, but is reudy to accept from any quarter
one which shall attain the end he has in niew—that
end 'wing the election of a House of Commons which
shall represent the people of the United kingdom
as on all occasions to be willing and able
to promote the welfare of the whole community.
To the attainment of this end thus generally stated, I
many means have been suggested ; and Mr. HUME '
shores his own freedom and lib:Tante of spit it, by
describing three different systems, with any one of
which lee states that he would lie satisfied. Ile in
this ow •s Ln example that may be of infinite service
to th se who, having assumed for themselves the
right of forming an opinion, deny it to all others—
men who coosieler all opposition heresy, and hesita-
tion u proof of insincerity.
Ili Mir, would doubtless assent to the very
gene r.l Mot iption we have gives of the end he has
in e u is ; but, from some expressions employed by
him it Edinhur;sll, there we fear our agrecvnent
would . nil. If from those expressions we nichtly
Interim t his meaning, his conception of what the
How, Commons ought to he appears to us not
only ilic..rrect, but is, in fact, it conception of an
imps Minty. Such a !louse of Commons as lie ais
panntly desires, ran never lie found; and, if found,
would prove a calamity in place of a blessing.
It is clear, that if we desire to frame efficient
amens to an end, we must accurately determine what
that old really is. Let us then endeavour to ascer-
tain, first, what we diem the House of Commons
ought to he ; and -slum we have settled this point,
we UPI pressed to discuss the various projects de-
vised t procure fur us this desired object. Much of
the difference,/ opinion existing among reformer; on
the whole subject of reform, arises front the unsettled
notions they entertain with respect to the nature of
the thing fur which they art striving; and assuredly
if II: ME. really expects ever to see such a flume
of Collations as he describes, he is doomed to inevit-
able still bitter ilisipp intone:it.
" The House of (*.ounces's," sae's Mr. Ill'ME.
"ought to npresent every man, whatever his inte-
rests or opinions might lie, aceorefing to the changes
going on in the country." Now, the only !louse of
Commons which could anomplish this feat would be
one CI et actually and bodily.included within its walls
every man in the notuntonity. This, however, is
simply impossible. Rut every seketion must Le in I
fart a compromise of opinions. No one matt in I
opinion is the counterpart of oily other; and no man
can by isssobility represent the various and varying I
opinions of the men who vette air him. Each elector
Cllimows from the candidates offered fir his choice,
that one with whom he ou the *hide must nearly •
lig I CV, (in this statement we put aside all considera-
Mo of corrupt voting;. On *OIIIC material points he i
Buds the candidate hobing opinions of which he up- I
proves. in issue others he discovers a difference of opt- I
Mum: Ist the agreemeut outweighs in value the diffe-
Tenet'. and he therefore votes fsr him. Now, what one
man d. ees al I do; so that, in reality, t he candidate chosen
cannel lie said to mon-sent "all the interests and
opinions" of any one of Isis constituents; and, in the
rant' manner, the House of Commons, composed of
much 'presentative-it cannot represent every man (or
indes .1 filly one man), whatever his interests or
opinions may be. The whole proceeding is a com-
ps •se -resulting front a multitude of compromises.
On Sonde important points the Ilouse of Commons,
taken Mk a whole, and deciding according to the
opinions id a majority of its in:embers might repre-
sent the opinion of the majority of its electors, but
neon r them this it cannot possibly approach to an
agree !tient with the feelings and interests of the se-
pirate constituents by whom it is chosen. And
the teal question for solution is, to what extent
',lmola this agreement he carried. There is a
pilot beyond which agnentent cannot go is it
for the interest of the conimuni,y that the agree-
ment between thee House of Commons and the nation,
including in that tern every man. woman, and child,
should reach this utmost limit of identity of feeling
and f interest 1' Most men are agreed, that this
131111,,,1 limit ought not to be sought for. Upon the
ground of inconsistency, minors and persons of un-
sound mind have, be must philosophers and law-
givers. been refused the privilege of voting. So also
have women, whether wisely or not is nut now the
question. Uri, ii i ll uls have in the same way. hut on a
different ground, been deprived of the nglit, if at
any time possessed by them, or the power of acquir-
ing it. after thee commission of an infumous offence.
It is unnecessary to extend the list of excluded
classes. or to allude further to the reasons
given for exclusion. Suffice it to say. that no person
yet has popes'sl that every human being in the com-
munity should have a voice in selecting the repre-
sent:rot :4 of the people. Exclusion to some extent
has by all been admitted. To what extent, in uc-

munity will to a favoured few be more agreeable
than to labour. They will endeavour to convert the
many into instruments for the furtherance of their
own pleasures, and subservient to their narrow and
private ends, as opposed to the general weal. On
the one ground, then, of mere interest, it behoves us
to have the electoral body so numerous that for them
it shall be more advantageous to secure the great
end of security as we have described it, in pre-
ference to seeking after an? narrow or special mo-
! nopoly of privilege or of enjoyment. The base
must be broad if we desire to make the superstruc-
ture secure against the assaults of private and sinister
interests.