The Express.
London, England, 1867-10-29 00:00:00

HOLBORN.

Tuts Eristsn, FOR LOVE. Messrs. IL J. Montague, Price.
Garden. Westland. and H. Middleman: Mesdames Stephens,
Henrade. C. launders, etc.—And MARY TURNGR : OR. THY
WICIOL WILLIN. Miss desspbs.—Wlth A. 8.9. Mr. Ray.

DRITANNIA.

THIS KIM/HIM WILD CHARLIE: OR, THE. LINK-BOY OF
OLD LOND4N. Mr. F. Chsetton.—lleillten Le Oland , Stump-
Orator West and Miss N. WeaI—BREAK, NOT BE: W. Mre.
S. Lane.—And THE HARVEST STORM.

NIGH WATER AT LONDON BRIDOL
*lll DAY —3lreenlag. 2k 62s.....—Afternain, 34 100.
NO•llo3.A.32,—Monslnk 3k Dial..—..4ll3senook 44.4 a.

LONDON, TUESDAY, OCTOBER 29.

Ir is devoutly to be wished, and perhaps faintly
to be expected, that when the Reformed House of
Commons meets in 1869 or 1870 it may find an
enlarged and remodelled chamber in which to
assemble. The Reform Bill of 1832 was followed
by the fire which destroyed the old House in
1834. We do not recommend this precedent for
imitation ; but what accident did then delibera-
tion may more wisely accomplish now. Mr. Dm-
HALL' threatens us with an increase in the number
of members. The old chamber was enlarged in
1800 to receive the Irish contingent which the
Act of Union drafted into the chapel of St.
Stephen's. The Scotch Reform Bill, which is the
work cut out for the next session, is to give us
—if the CHANCELLOR Of the EXCHEQUER adheres
to his first intention and can persuade Parlia-
ment to adopt it—more Scotch representatives.
Where will room be found for them ? The House
of Commons is too small for its present occupants.
There is accommodation on the floor and in the
galleries for four hundred and thirty members out
of six hundred and fifty-eight. It is true that the
House is seldom full ; that is to say, that members
attend very laxly to their duties ; but it may be
hoped that the members of the Reformed Parlia-
ment will be more conscientious. At any rate, it
is undesirable that they should have so good an
excuse for absenteeism as the perpetuation of the
present state of things would afford them. The
possibility of making some change in the arrange-
ments of the House of Commons so as to enable a
greater number of members to hear and take part
in its proceedings was last session referred to
a Select Committee, which took evidence, and
recommended the further prosecution of the in-
quiry next year. No optimist has been found
satisfied with things as they are. Private mem-
bers, members of the Government, reporters,
officers of the House, and architects, all condemn
the existing arrangements. Not very long since,
a protracted and animated discussion took place in
the columns of a contemporary as to the author-
ship of the designs from which the present Houses
of Parliament were constructed. Whether the '
national monument of extravagance, inconveni-
ence, and gorgeous bad taste shall be known to
posterity as " BARRY'S Folly," or as PuolN's, is
a matter of secondary importance. The repre-
sentative of the late Sir CasaLra BARRY, while
claiming for his father the credit of the
designs as a whole, feels it necessary to disavow
responsibility for the construction of the chamber
in which the Commons meet. Sir CHARLES was
bound, his son states, by strict instructions as to
the dimensions of the House, and the accommoda-
tion which he originally provided has been since
restricted. Of the several plans for the enlarge-
ment of the House suggested to the Committee
by Mr. E. M. Baser, the most comprehensive
would leave a hundred members without seats.
A plan proposed by Mr. Titonsos HANICEY
would find room for as many as six
hundred and ten. The need of easier AreP•gl
to the libraries, committee-rooms, and refresh-
ment-rooms, and of private rooms in which
ministers may meet and members confer with
their constituents, was the subject of interesting
evidence. On all these points we might perhaps
trust members of the House of Commons to con-
sult their own comfort and convenience, which is
that of the 'public, if some among them were
not apparently possessed by a relic of the old
jealousy of making the House of Commons
too popular. Their idea of it seems to be
that of a sort of legislative bank parlour, or pri-
vate committee room, rather than that of a hall of
public assembly. To be small, close, and incon-
venient, and fitted for conversation across the
table more naturally than for debate, is in their
eyes a positive merit.

This feeling conies strongly into play whenever
the reporters' gallery is in question. The fiction
that the short-hand writers are there on sufferance
is dear to the hearts of many honourable members,
who nevertheless when they speak, speak less to be
heardthan to be reported. Thecelebrated resolution
of the 13th of April, 1738, in which the House
of Commons denounced the printing of any ac-
count of the debates or other proceedings of the
House as a high indignity and notorious breach of
privilege, and threatened to proceed with the ut-
most severity against offenders, was natural enough
in times when the House of Commons represented
private interests and practically disowned public
responsibility. In the days in which Dr. Joassois,
always taking good care that the Whig dogs
had not the boat of the argument, wrote the de-
bates of the Senate of Lilliput, in which Hutto°
HICKRAD or Wimata. Pr tsus denounced the
ambitious designs of the neighbouring nation of Ble-
fuscu, or pointed out the danger of the metropolis
of Mildendo ; or at the later period when BURKE
" strained his throat," less to guide public opinion
than " to persuade Tommy Towitsawn to lend him I
"a vote ;" wheu divisions were turned by private'
memoranda from the KING announcing that he
should account as his enemies all those who voted
for a particular measure or ministry—report-
ing was naturally disliked. It was an
appeal to the public, and the House of