The Sun.
London, England, 1831-07-11 00:00:00

otiniliating in either or both Houses of Legislature
•omplying ; for from what source do the Houses
'ioth emanate? From the people.—Times.
We on Friday laid before our readers specimens
f the wealth of those boroughs, the representation
which has been either abolished or curtailed from
heir acknowledged Insignificance; or, in other
fords, the places included in the condemned ache-
'ules A and B. Nobody, we presume, will have
he hardiliessd 'to argue—the bold contempt of
•ommon sense and common consistently t-o declare
—that after public attention was officially called to
the question) stirill an anomaly as boroughs without
-iroperty and without' inhabitants should be continued
n the right of sending Members to Parliament, While
ethers with immense wealth and extensive popula-
-ion were entirely excluded trOm that privilege. As
'nag as the validity of the principle was admitted,
hat the existence of the elective rights of Old
Sarum was as necessary to the preservation of the
Constitution as those of the largest city in the em-
pire, and that by touching one rotten corner of the
edifice for the purpose of repairing it, we endangered
the safety of the whole, it was quite consistent and
easonable to resist the arguments drawn from such
comparative statements; but as soon as one borough
was touched, oh account of its insignificance,—as
soon, for instance, as Beeralston, which pays only
3/. 9s. in assessed taxes, having one house of 101.
valued rent, was to be disfranchised in favour of Man-
chester or Birmingliarn,—it was not possible to stop
short of the whole range embraced by the two sche-
dules. But the opponents of the Bill, seeing that
the ground of rotten-boroughs was untenable,--
aware that they could make no fight for these dar-
ling nuisances against a people determined on abat-
ing them, and observing that the cry of " corpora-
tion robbery," and " Jacobin spoliation," raised in
vain from behind their mouldering walls, would not
deter the hand of improvement from approaching
them, pretend now to be alarmed, not at what is
destroyed, but what is conferred,—not at the ope-
rations of the bande noire, who are clearing away
the rubbish for a new constituency, but at the ex-
tension of that constituency to the lower classes,
and at the universal mobs who will henceforward
invade every polling booth, or cover with their
names every church door in the kingdom. If these
persons would condescend to read the documents
submitted to Parliament—as plain reasoners—or, if
they could so far master their interested alarms as to
be able to attend to a simple statement of facts, they
might satisfy themselves that their objections to this
part of the Bill are as groundless as to the other.
There can be no question that the constituency will
be increased beyond its present amount in most of
the large towns which are at present represented,
and that the body of electors of the whole kingdom
will be enlarged by conferring the right of voting
on some thirty or forty places which have now no
voice whatever in the representation. If this had
not been done, no person in his senses could have
called the Bill a measure of Parliamentary Reform;
but let its enemies take courage—the number of con-
stituents which it will leave in most of the smaller
towns will not be very formidable. They have all
heard of schedule A and schedule B, because they
are considered by them the inventory of " corpora-
tion robberies." Suppose that these boroughs had
maintained their place in the Constitution, arid that
this formidable extension of the right of voting had
been substituted by some daring democratic innova-
tors in lieu of the present conservative, select, and
aristocratic constituency, how many voters would
there have been found to create mobs at the next
election ? Beeralston would have exactly one voter,
having only one mansion in the whole borough pay-
ing 104 of rent; Boesiney would be in the same
Predicament. St. Mawes likewise rejoices in one
10/. householder; Dunwich would be so fortunate as

to have two ; Castle Rising would be equally
happy; the extended suffrage of Aldeburgh would
amount to three ; Bletchingley could boast of five;
West Looe would send to the polling booths eight
ten-pounders to return its two Members; and the

coniituency of St Michael's would be equally free
from democratic elemtnts, being confined likewise to
eight. Why need we celebrve the peaceful voting of
the extended suffrage of Corfe Castle, with its 11
ten-pounders ; of Higham-Ferrets, with its 8; of
Ga.ton, with its 6; of Bedwin, with 2; of Lugder-
shall, with its 4, and of other places of the same
wealth and population ? The extension of fianchise
could not certainly therefore have created riots in
schedule A, though it had not been so unmercifully
condemned. One of its boroughs (Bramber) would
have had no voter at all. If we go to the 50 and

odd old boroughs which aro still allowed to send one

Member to Parliament, we shall find that this demo-
cratic element, the 101. qualification, makes a terrible
havoc among the electors—mole terrible than the
cholera on its first appearance. Amersham, for in-
stance, will have a convenient constituency of 25;
Arundel of 120; Ashburton, of 54; Bridport, of
146; Clitheroe, of 60; East Grinstead, of 42;
Okehampton, of 42 ; Nlalmesbury, of 7.5; and so
on with the rest of the list. As the Reform Bill
has wisely determined that no representative
of the people shall be sent to Parliament by
a lower constituency than 300, and as this
number of persona qualified to vote by the occupa-
tion of a house of 101. rent, or value, annually, can-
not be found in any of the boroughs which retain
the privilege of electing one Member, it will be ne-
cessary in the whole of schedule B to procure the
necessary complement of electors from the districts
bordering on the deficient boroughs. The very cir-
cumstance that those places averaging from 3,000
to 4,000 inhabitants, cannot muster in any case 300
lectors, on the new qualification, and in most cases
not 100, is a proof that the Bill, so far from being
democratic in its tendency and provisions, is liable
to objectors and objections of an entirely different
class. If we follow the new representation which
the Bill takes away from the rotten and nomination
boroughs, and trace its distribution over the rest

of the empire, observing, as we proceed, into
what hands it is to fall, we shall have equal
grounds to relieve the trembling alarmist of
democracy from his exaggerated terrors.—
Where the constituency of the counties is essentially
altered, it is altered in a manner to confer greater
power upon the landed aristocracy. The former
freeholders are still to retain their rights unimpaired,
and the new class of voters created on leasehold

pial;fication, though they may be equally respectable
%.ith the freeholders, are not likely to he more re-
fractory to the influence of their landlords. Indeed

the letter of a " Reformer," which we publish in
another column, chews the side on which the chief

alarm lies with regard to this part of the Reform
Bill. In th• case of the large cities and borough*
which retain their old franchises, and those which

receive the power of choo,ing representatives, for
the first time, by the Bill, the constituency will, in
some instances, be diminishcd, and in no instance
_ .

ncreesed, so as to be formidable for its magnitude or

mobs. The electors of Mr. Henry Hunt's borough

be reduced from several thousands to 976.

The Duke of Newcastle will, unfortunately, have

more power in Newark after the Reform than before,

as the 10/. qualification will reduce the number of
its voters to 351. The great, populous, and
wealthy town of Birmingham will only have
4,561 voters; the extensive manufacturing bo-
rough of Manchester only 3,338; Leeds, only
2,492; and Liverpool will not much increase

its present constituency. We need scarcely
mention that from the high rate of house-
rent in the capital, the 101. qualification will
include a much greater proportion of the inhabitants
than in any other town or city in the empire; yet
in the city of London the number of persons so
qualified amounts to only 13,599. In Westmin-
ster, as the suffrage is nearly universal already, or
least is commensurate with householders, very
little change in the constituency will take place.
But in speaking of the additional numbers which
the Bill will introduce into the electoral colleges of
the metropolis, by the minimum qualification of a
101. rent, it ought to be recollected that no rea-
sonable amount ,of qualification could prevent them
from being great, When the opponents of the Bill