The Sun.
London, England, 1852-03-26 00:00:00

OWland 2"11,

LONDON, FRIDAY. MARCH 26, 1852.

The veteran Member for Montrose—the faithful,
consistent, and indefatigable JOSENI HOME, last

night brought forward his annual motion, asking for
leave to bring in a Bill to amend the representation

of the people. His propositions were, indeed, of the
most satisfactory character. The measure founded
thereon would truly deserve the title of " The New

Reform Bill," which was arrogantly bestowed on the
miserable abortion introduced with so much parade
and self-gratulation by the ex-Premier at the
commencement of the session. The great points
of Parliameniary reform, were, with one ex-
ception, fully and fairly brought under con-
sideration, and although the " abolition of the

property qualification for Members," was omitted
_ ____

: - -
A was not from any carelessness or indifference to
the much-required alteration, but simply because the

question was already before the House in a separate
form, and the almost certain success of the Bill in-

troduced by the Right Honourable Gentleman the
Member for Devon might possibly be endangered by
the subject-matter being connected with other mat-

tars on which a greater diversity of opinion prevailed.
The remaining points were, however, all noticed. We
had-Ist, The extension of the franchise ; 2d, protection

to the voter in the exercise of that franchise,

by the privilege of secret voting by the ballot ;
3d, The maintenance of a salutary control by the
constituencies over their respective representatives,
by " the limitation of the duration of Parliament,"
and 4th, The more equitable distribliti.. or .1..t.ral
power, no Ilia& the proportion of representatives
might be made more consistent with the amount of

population and property. We have so frequently
insisted upon the paramount necessity for each and
every of these changes, and advanced arguments in
their favour, that it would be a work of supereroga-
tion to enter into the subject at any length on
the present occasion. We shall therefore
merely contrast the propositions of JOSEPH
HOME with those of Lord JOHN RUSiELL,
in order that the community in general, the non-
electors as well as the electors, may be enabled to
judge as to which may be most expedient and satis-
factory to the country. _ _

And, first, on the extension of the franchise
There would have been unquestionably a considerable
increase in the number of electors, if the proposition
of Lord JOHN RUSSELL had been accepted ; and we
have always willingly admitted, that it would have
been a considerable improvement on the existing
system in that respect. But the question now is,
whether Mr. HUME'S measure, giving the right of
suffrage not only to every householder rated to the
relief of the poor for twelve months preceding the
time of registration, but to every inhabitant of a
portion of a house, similarly circumstanced, is not
greatly to be preferred, as doing justice to all, and
being, in fact, a final settlement of the question. If
taxation and representation should be coincident, in
accordance with the ancient constitutional principle,
there can be no sufficient reason assigned why every
person who for twelve months had occupied a
dwelling in respect whereof he contributed
to the relief of the poverty of the district,
thus having " a local habitation and a name"
during that period, should not be entitled to a vote,
although his tenement were not rated to the full
amount of 51. per annum. This part of the case,
however, is not of so much practical importance, for
as the Honourable Gentleman the Member for
Sheffield justly remarked, there are vary few houses
under the value of 51. per annum—labourers obtaining
only 9e. per week paying that rent. But it would
be an unwise and arbitrary distinction, creating
considerable annoyance and heart-burnings in the
minds of those who might be excluded, although in
every respect as well qualified as others who paid a
few pence per week more rent.
The great point, however, is the admission of
lodgers, or persons occupying exclusively a portion
Of a house or tenement, and rated to the relief
of the poor in respect thereof. Now, we ask what
actual difference does there exist between such per-
sons and householders, that the latter should be so
highly favoured at the expense of the former. Is it
the intention or wish of the Legislature to prevent
the erection of handsome substantial dwellings divided
into different allotments, where every occupant
would enjoy advantages which he could not possibly
obtain in a cottage worth far more, than 51. a year ?
It was one of the great objections to the infamous
tax on light and air, now happily removed, that it
practically prohibited such buildings, in which many
'different families might occupy flats, as is the
custom in Scotland and many parts of the
bontinent. It was considered essential to remove
that objection, even at a serious loss to the revenue,
and now we would have the obnoxious principle re-
stored, and a great inducement held out for the con.
cacichuelaapted for, we can scarcely call
and exceedingly nasty
sihtto,ruutschete
houses,
n of y
of each n
accommodation
a single family, in place of
the larger and more convenient domiciles, worth 701.
ovelry
or 801. per annum, and each containing comfortably
six or eight families. The matter appears too clear
to admit of argument; the lodger, who had been in
occupation twelve months, paying rates and taxes,
would surely be as eligible to a vote in every respect
as the householder.
On the ballot and the duration of Parliament there
can be no comparison, for Lord Joule RUSSELL com-
pletely ignores these much required reforms, opposing
them with the inveterate perversity of a Tory of the
olden time ; while Mr. HUME makes full and fair pro-
vision for the exigencies of the case, effectually guard.
ing the voter against bribery and intimidation, and all
the corrupt influences that may be brought into opera-
tion. He also, while affording a reasonable tenure of
his seat to every representative, would yet reduce
its occupancy to such a period as would render
it desirable for every Member to respect the wishes
and feelings of his constituents, and keep in accord-
ance with the views of those by whom he was
placed in his high position. Mr. HMS's Bill has,
therefore, clearly the advantage in these re-
spects, and so we believe it will be de-
cided when the fitting time shall arrive, and
the electors are required to record their votes at the
hustings.
Bat the difference on the last point is even greater ;
for Lord Joan RUSSELL'S Bill was positively ob-
jectionable. It attempted to carry out a Whig
job of the most flagrant description. It
professed to preserve the existing state of parties
rather than to bestow the right of representation
on those „large towns which had sprung into im-
portance. It restored many of the rotten boroughs
that had been, most properly, disfranchised, and
might thus be considered as directly opposed to the
principle of the Reform Bill of 1832, as being a reac
tienary and retrograde movement. Now, although the
details of Mr. Hume's measure were not, and could not
at that stage of the proceedings be set forth, yet the
principle was so clearly explained that no doubt
could remain of its superiority to the rival pro-
position.

One word as to the nature of the opposition.
Mr. Hums has just cause to complain of
those who shrunk from avowing their prin-
ciples, or disregarded their former protestations.
We therefore earnestly commend the division list
dtoecuni
theentcotnbsaitdeerbaetieolnd b
ofe tlhargeeilnydependent electors
throughout the country. It will prove an instructive
con
any choice should be finally The
wilful and determined opponents of reform are
c before
made.sulte 1
bad enough, and should be avoided, but the rats and
t most strenuously
e c HtNc E
time-servers are, if possible, worse, and should be
mt
i,Lo a of t repudiated.he Excitau
Ve regretappeared to
stand on the finality of the Act of 1832. This was the
policy that disgusted the nation and alienated the
people from Lord JOHN Russr.J.,. If the existing
lEs
that to find
st
the
Government desire to retain power they must bt. pre-
pared to conform with the advanced spirit of the age,
and to concede the much-required ameliorations so
anxiously looked for by the community. No_Ad.