The Express.
London, England, 1847-08-03 00:00:00

J`
~i
/ LZ/ ~~- - Z

vie eportsql.

2,14/L#:

The ore Ise British North Airrii lerraia, sad the Cotton
deer tell be are up en the ewersrtre Ord Augur.
Tb ex erred rade tor Carr: /110KOneete, the lonian lehode„
Egypt, rem, derld• brie, ad OW, re Souttaa4,tre
, win bi ore up ea tie erniet etre
' The sere he Or Deere. the Mrs Pletkalreete Video, Perrot-
, bre. Mkt. thasis and Semen Apr% lan be made tp en the
evernialbe
The orb tie V4,lllllCdo, Urea, Murry Cadiz, and Oitrattor
inn be mob a tbe mere' mitts Ith Arun.
The deer re Igreettlee, to the Pgrelltrnaran.
Egypt, Yee, Orden, bra. Jam Ise., will be made up on the
ernineafre 7tb err;
The Wed India molk. mai( Ore kr Nal" Honduras, asi
the dereash, eta be der up es the newarg of re 17th Atter.
The ram for Ned Verb Wake, Vila Marrs Land, and New
Zeduld VW be made op is the evening of the art August.

telo 10 COItIIBrONDINTIL
Nerd deil be To Lewes, Lemke •••••tyl paper, man b.
in deadest. We Veda nu do cap of publication.

RIOS WATIR AT LONDOII4kIO4II,
Tu.. 06i—ila6baz St =IA. pa 66 6 ; pAH 6.
To-liensoor—Msnalag, W. foe ;.

LONDON, TUESDAY, AUG. 3.
Tna Times, constituting itself the Treaaury organ,
announced, at the commencement of the elections,
that the nature of their result was already f. 40-
cast, and that this would be a working majority of
30 to the present ministry—a majority which, though
small, was peculiarly its own, and would preclude
its having recoaree to other parties in the hoar of a
division. . .

We regret to say that the elections, as they become
known, do not at all bear out the exactitude of this
prophecy. The liberal side may, indeed, have gained
ems thirty votes—that, too, by rejectinkr some men
who, though called conservatives, arc an favour of
freedom of conscience and of trade. Moreover, there
have been changes in the different shades of liberal-
ism; and than changes, we fear, instead of serellias
the working majority of any ministry whatever, vidt
be found to be merely a replacing of praeleal
liberals by impracticable ones. Ireland, whose
staple produce in polities is the mad and the imprac-
ticable, will of course increase the latter quality of
representatives. And what, then, we should be glad
to know, is to be done with the House of Commons?
If, indeed, these were quiet times—quiet, we mean,
in domestic policy—if the public was contented that
the state should rest on its oars, and government
merely govern, ministers might be found to perform
the simple task of administration with skill and good
results. But such is not the humour of the

pub
It is eager for change, impatient of repose, as frill
of go-a-head ideas as lotearnari himself. And as for
ministers, prune or secondary, hoping ever to take a
nap, that is out of the question. The statesman for
the English public, at present, is he that will do most.
And this is SIT ROBERT PEEL'S incontestable merit. Al
a servant of ell work he promises to do more than any
ten, and without saying exactly what he will do, Sir
ROBERT has sought to persuade honest JOHN But•
that, were he taken into ministerial service, and
charged with the general management, he would effect
such a clearing, such a repairing, and Buil.* an
economy, that every political housewife in the country
would bless her stars for the advent of suck a prodigy.
Three-fourths of these pretensions of PEEL are no
doubt prodigious humbug, but they are, in • great
measure, successful humbug, u far as he himself is on-
earned, and have the effect of disparaging and we* n-
Mg the more honest and less artful efforts of the whig
Imilere. In fifty instances the radicals and the imps.. 4
Make Will abandon Lord Jo lIN for Sir 1100 E nr,acu their
balancing between the two men will render both
unsafe. They will probably help neither to ver-
come the other, and yet, if both coalesce, they will go
into opposition against both; so that really the pro-
blem of how to form a strong liberal government, or
even a strong semi-liberal government of progrves,
becomes something of as difficult solution as a neli-
tical algebraist might require.
The elections seem not at all calculated to remedy
the state of incertitude, the mutual neutralisation of
parties and power, which made people long for the
dissolution of the late parliament. The present else-
Bons have undone in some degree, but not wholly,
the reaction of 1841. Bat taking place under no
strong feeling or dominant idea, we dare not hope
that they have returned a parliament much more
likely than the last to show a decided majority, or to
ensure a compact and strong government.
The Times calculates that "in the parliament
recently dissolved, the protectionists formed nearly
' one-fourth of the whole number, and the Pint. party
were of equal strength."
We cannot admit this to be correct. In the great
free trade and protectionist divisions of 1848, the free
traders, including Peelitee and liberals, were about
340; the protectionists, 240. Of the 340 majority, the
Peelites did not exceed 112. It may be true that
Lord GEORGE BENTINCE, in his vagaries during the
last session, could not command a greater fol-
lowing than 112 or 120 ; but this is no crite-
rion of what the party really was, or might
have been, under an able leerier. In taking
the late Home of Commons and calculating
from the changes effected by the late election, wo
must estimate the strength of parties by the large
and decisive "otes of 1816. And if we scrutie;se
and count up these changes, as we have endeavoured to
do in a list given in another column, we fear in*
that the result will be found to be what we have
plored—a balance of parties, likely to render govern-
ment just as difficult in 1848 as it was in

WE, apples. swim. After the close of the poll in
Glasgow, Mr. DENNISTOUN informed his committee.
in confidence, that his case was the exact countei part
of Mr. MACAULAY'S. If Mr. DENNISTOUN can find In
this parallel such consolation as Sir GEOFFREY HUD-
' SON found in being arraigned on the same charge as
the jolly six-feet knight PEYERIL of the Peak, it
would be cruel to grudge it to him. Bat to any other
than Mr. DENNISTOUN the two Cafes present much
more of contrast than similitude. Until this lest elec-
tion, Edinburgh has been represented—as large
constituencies returning two members are best
represented—by one gentleman of local weight
and influence. who is presumed to bo con-
versant with the affairs of the district, and one gen-
tleman of public eminence qualified to advocate the
views of general policy maintained by the majority
of the electors. Edinburgh has ceased to be so repre-
sented ; and Glasgow, which hitherto has not been so
represented. is now. In short, the result of the
Glasgow is exaotly the converse of the Edinburgh
election. Glasgow has got its COWAN off its shoulders,
and Edinburgh has encumbered itself its
DENN/STOUN. . .

The result of the Glasgow election is ono of
which any constituency might be proud. Four enit-
didates offered themselves. Their avowed principles—
principles which all of them were known to 11.4v0
avowed consistently for years—were essentially the
same. Had the electors been satisfied it ith mete
professions—with a mere election " cry," to adopt the
phraseology of the Tapers and Tadpoles—any e-no
candidate was as good as another. Bet the Glesgoly
electors went more closely to work, and scrutinised
narrowly the ability of the candidates to act up to
their professions. They found that Mr. DENNIor,, um,
during his ten years of public service, was utterly
inefficient; they found Mr. DIXON stooping to be the
cat's-paw of the coterie which sought to force
Mr. DENNISTOUN again upon the electors; end
they wisely resolved to have nothing to do
with mere men of professions, " promise they
never so fairly." In Mr. MACGREGOR they
found a man who had shown himself possessed
of the intelligence, energy, and perseverance required
for public business in the service of government, and
in Mr. HASTIE one who had developed in their local
affairs the talents best fitted for the wear and tear of
, the senate; and they chose these men as having
ability to perform as well as to promise. 'fho in, at
unscrupulous devices were resorted to by the friends
of the rejected candidates, but the sturdy citizens of
Glasgow were not to be deterred from their purpose,
and they carried their men triumphantly.
There is one circumstance connected with these 1 wo
elections which our liberal leaders will do well act to
neglect. At Glasgow the same elements of confusion
—soreness about free-church matters, cenColod
ideas relative to the question of Roman catho-
lic and general toleration, and the like—
existed in as ample abundance as at Fein-
burgh. Yet the result at Glasgow is a decided
improvement in the representation: at Edinburgh
quite as decided a deterioration. The position of the
ei-decant liberal leaders in both places explains tho
contradiction. At Glasgow, the former popular
leaders are left even more unequivocally " alone in their
glory" than at Edinburgh. Bat, at Edinburgh, the
malcontents of the liberal inclining who secede have
no organisation, no leaders to take the place of the
old. In Glasgow an efficient committee to conduct
the election of MeEsrs. HASTIE and MACGREGOR was
organised at once, and that committee is now about to