The Sun.
London, England, 1853-05-05 00:00:00

{From the Morning Post.)

Whether its self-imposed task be the ventilation of
the rooms in which its businesss is transacted, or the
purification of the members who constitute it, the House
of Commons seems equally puzzled and baffled in its
attempts to make up its mind as to the principles on
which it should proceed. Six hundred and fifty-six
gentlemen, with unlimited means at their disposal, and
cramped by no scruples as to using them, have been
for years suffering from icy draughts, and heated cur-
rents, such as are to be found nowhere save in fervid
priestly descriptions of purgatory. They have dis-
cussed their miseries in the full conclave of a House,
and have inquired into them by the more minute ma-
chinery of committees--yet their sufferings are unabated,
their house unpurified— and they have still a new palace
' in which they can neither see; hear, nor breathe—and
the only result is a status quo and a claim for an enor-
mous amount of compensation from the ventilator, who
considers himself aggrieved by being disturbed. in his
experiments on the physique of his victims...We recom-
mend this illustration of the efficacy ancrecOnomy of
Parliamentary proceedings to the especial notice of Mr.
William Williams.
Nor has the house been a whit more fortunate in its
attempts to purge itself of its moral impurities. The
leader of the house, amidst cheers from all sides, has
denounced the corrupt modes by which the Legislative
Assembly of Great Britain has been got together—five-
and-twenty committees, with the assistance of a huge
array of counsel learned in the law, have groped for
days and weeks among the corruptions of constituencies
—eighteen members have been reported to have been
vicariously guilty of bribery, amidst the loud approba-
tion of the house, yet things are just as they were, and
nobody has been punished for these high offences except
Thomas Morgan, who has been sentenced to pay a fine
of one shilling to the Queen ; while the discussions which
take place whenever the issue or suspension of a writ is
proposed, show that the house is just as far off as it was
six months ago from any distinct perception as to the
means which it should adopt for remedying the evils of
which it so loudly complains, and into the particulars of
which it so laboriously and expensively examines.
Yet there is no lack of suggestions. Sir John Shelley,
who appears to be bent, like Don Quixote, on the re-
dress of all wrongs and grievances, and tilts at them about
as rationally, is for universal prosecutions, and deems
the report of a committee indisputable ground for setting
the Attorney-General in motion. Mr. Berkeley and the
Manchester School take the opportunity of advertising
the ballot; Lord John Russell utters grave denunciations,
and insists upon commissions; and Mr. Drummond suggests
that we should let the corrupt remain undisturbed in the
enjoyment of their corruption, because society—at least
political society—is a mass of corruption, and the more
you stir it the more it stinks. For our own part, we do
not see much virtue in any of these suggestions. As long
as the law exists in its present form, and attaches to the
offence of bribery such enormous and unreasonable pe-
nalties, prosecutions for its infraction will always be fu-
tile, because it is found impossible to induce juries to
bring by conviction offenders under its disproportionate
punishments. Nor will the inquiries of commissions
have much useful result till the house places within their
view, and that of the public, some practical conclusion to
which their labours may visibly tend. Perhaps Mr.
Drummond's suggestion may be practically adopted
after all. The house seems, in truth, rather wearied of
its profitless onslaughts on corruption. At any rate,
neither the threats nor the actual proceedings of the
house have, 'as yet, had any visible effect on the con-
stituencies ; for we observe that many of these which
within this very session have been adjudged guilty, are
likely to be again upon their trial.
Mr. Drummond's amusing, but mischievous, speech,
however, is calculated to do more harm among the people
at large than corrupt elections in half the boroughs in
England. It is calculated to do harm, because its ten-
dency is to produce an impression upon the popular mind
that the whole of society is so thoroughly demoralised,
and the motives which influence men in action, through-
out the governing classes, are of so corrupt and base a
nature, that the practice among freemen and 101. house-
holders of bartering their votes for money shows pure by
the side of them ; and that the only thing for which they
ghoul,' take shame to themselves is the smallness of the
price at which they permit themselves to be bought.
Now, although we do not think very highly of the mate-
rials, in the gross, of which the Parliament of 1852 is con-
stituted, we have no hesitation in saying that Mr.
Drummond's picture of the Legislature, and of political
society, is distorted and untrue.

What is the evil which Parliament is attempting to
remedy, and what are the practices which its committees
are seeking to punish ? The offence for which a mem-
ber and an elector are reported to the house does not re-
sult from the fact that the member gives, and the elec-
tor receives, a reward for faithful and zealous political
services, nor from the circumstance that the one uses
the influence which he has with the Government of the
Jay, from an existence of relations between it and him-
self of a character similar to those which obtain between
himself and the elector, in order to forward the views
and interests of the latter. The essence of the offence
is the existence of a corrupt bargain between the two
parties to the transaction • and, however much men may
be influenced in going into Parliament by the hope of
obtaining, in return for their services to their party,
preferment for themselves, or political influence for
others, we honestly believe that there could rarely be
found an instance of a corrupt bargain for a vote between
a Government and any of its supporters. The division
of political men into separate parties is a necessary con-
sequence of the representative system ; and to expect that
those of a party who attain power and high place should
not consider first in the disposal of patronage their own
friends and supporters. or to find fault with them for
doing it, is absurd and unreasonable. They have a per-
fect title to do so, as long as they so administer their
patronage that the public service shall not suffer in the

-pleasuring of their allies. The most extravagant purist
could hardly expect, if a blue ribbon fell to the disposal
of Lord Aberdeen, that he should recommend her Ma-
jesty to bestow it upon Lord Derby, or that any which
fell in during the tenure of office by the latter should
have been given to Lord Grey, their being plenty of men
among the supporters of each whose services and posi-
tion entitle them, on their own merits, to such a distinc-
tion.

As regards the case of Sir Frederic Smith which
provoked the discussion and the speech of Mr. Drum-
mond, we must say that we do not think that there is a
shadow of a pretence for the institution of a prosecu-
tion against him. We have just again read over the
case of Greathead very carefully ; and if, as we are
bound to conclude from their report, that was the only
case in the minds of the committee when they decided
that Sir Frederic Smith was not duly elected, we are
strongly of opinion that their decision was an erroneous
one. We fail to discover any evidence of the corrupt
contract which is necessary to constitute bribery in the
transactions between Sir Frederic Smith and the elector
Greathead ; and from the very vague and feeble expla-
nations made in the house by the members of the com-
mittee, we are inclined to infer that the committee was
in the same condition, and came to their decision rather
under the influence of comprehensive and puzzled im-
pressions than from any clear and distinct perception of
facts.