The Sun.
London, England, 1830-11-17 00:00:00

boroughs formerly, and only circumscribed by war-
potion. In counties the copyholders should hare
voles as well as the freeholder', for the reason the:
originally distinguished them from each other in this
respect no longer exists, and leaseholders to a cer-
tain value ought to have the same political rights as
freeholders. We have stated the general outline of
the plan of reform which we advocate—we leave to
others the details.—Morning Herald.
With the precise nature or extent of the reform
scheme, which Mr. Brougham intends to put forth
this evening (Tuesday) we are unacquainted; the
enunciation' however, of his proposition, with which
he favoured the House on the first day of the Ses-
sion, is sufficient for our purpose. I desire," he
said " not revolution, but restoration; not to de-
stroy the Constitution, but to repair it," thus refer-
ring to some system of purity and excellence which,
as he insinuates, existed at a former period. The
simple query so well put by Mr. Canning, " To
what golden era do you refer *t" has never yet been
answered, and is in fact unanswerable. We confi-
dently assert that et no period of our history has
the house of Commons presented that " full, fair,
and equal Representation" to which mistaken theo-
rists and evil-delfigning innovators would reduce us.
The House of Commons is, to every practical pur-
pose, as popular in its composition at the present
day as it ever has been or ever ought to be.—
The existing system' under which Great Britain
bus attained the highest glory and prospe-,
rity, is coincident with the true spirit of
our ancient Constitution, which utterly disclaim;
the principles of the reformers; for let us examine
those most prominently put forward. A principal
objection is made to the interference of Peers, how-
ever indirectly, in the election of Members of Par-
liament ; whets it is obvious that if Peers had no
influence in the Lower House, a jealousy and hosti.
I;ty would be created between the two branches of
the Legislature, that must terminate in the extinc-
tion of the House of Lords, which is too evidently
the weaker party; and there can be no doubt that
this influence, which it is sought to extinguish,
hardly compensates,for the increased power of the
Commons, and is only ju-t sufficient to prevent the
whole of the legislative power being vested in one
single Chamber. Take away the influence of the
Peers in the House of Commons, and in the event
of any question arising touching the peculiar inte-
rests of either branch of the Legislature, we should
immediately find one House unanimously favourable
to it on one side, and the other al unanimously op-
posed to it But even supposing that the powers
of the Lords could be maintained when their inte-
rests are completely separated from those of the
Commons, still the harmony could not be preserved
which at present pervades the whole machinery of
the Constitution. The influence of a Peer at pre-
sent proceeds from the estate which he possesses,
either in a county or the neighbourhood of a
borough ; but this influence is always restricted
within certain limits; if his policy is injurious to
the county, even his tenants may on the whole find
it their interest to oppose him. But it is not only
confined within certain limits ; it is also mutual;
if the borough or county support the nominee of
the Peers in the House of Commons, their interest
is also supported by him in the House of Lords. It
is further proposed to do away with the small
boroughs, and vest their franchise in the large un-
represented towns, the objection to which (that in
that case many important interests would be unrepre-
sented) has been often repeated, though it has
never yet been satisfactorily answered. The East
India Company and the Bank may be allowed to
send Members to Parliament ; but still the
West India interests, the Colonial and Mining
interests, would remain unrepresented, and,
what is still more important, the represen-
tation could not adapt itself to the Waists of the
different classes, which are constantly changing. But
at present, if the-shipping or any other interest is
declining, some of those most concerned are able to
get into Parliament, and there to urge such measures
as are most likely to remedy the evils of which they
complain. No doubt this is often accomplished in
a manner highly objectionable, and it is well that the
evil should be checked when it assumes the form of
open competition; but this should be dune in detail
as a punishment, and not be grounded on an abstract
principle, the fallacy of which, when not corrected
by practical experience, has been sufficiently shown
in the course of French legislation. It is also de-
sirable that the great towns should be represented;
but this has beets commenced by the transfer of the
franchise of Grampound to Yorkshire, the two ad.
ditional members for which, are supposed to be re-
turned by the great manufacturing towns in that
county. One other change which is supposed to be
contemplated is quite out of the power of the Le-
gislatui ti if they hold the Articles of Union between
Scotland and England to be inviolable. The Scotch
Articles require that no fundamental change should
be made in the law of Scotland as it existed before
the Union; and if it were a part of that law that the
elective franchise should be derived from royalties,
and not from freeholds, we do not see that Parlia-
ment, even in its omnipotence, has u right to violate
the contract under which the Scotch Legislature
consented to unite itself (though a minority) with
that of England. The British Constitution has gra-
dually adapted itself to British wants and British in-
terests, but is still essentially that under which our
ancestors flourished. The American Constitution
is no longer that which Washington approved, and
where its democracy will end it is impossible to tell.
The French have passed forty years of revolution,
and the movement (as they themselves express it)
has once mote begun, The question is, where will
it end ? Mr. Pitt favoured Parliamentary Reform
in 1788, but he would not venture to approach that
subject after the French Revolution had commenced.
—Morning Post.