The Sun.
London, England, 1836-03-23 00:00:00

cess of its joy the nation forgot that these measures
contained the most excellent guarantees for its inde-
pendence, if prudently exercised ; and thus our
liberties were again exposed to the caprice of tyranny.
The Revolution of 1688 opened all men's eyes to
these dangers ; and the question of Triennial Par-
liaments was once more revived. HALLAM, in his
Constitutional History, thus details the reasons which
induced Parliament to insist on the passing of that

measure :
" The enormous duration of seventeen years, for
which CHARLES 11. protracted his second Parliament,
turned the thoughts of all who desired improvements
in the Constitution towards some limitation on a pre-
rogative which had not hitherto been' thus abused.
Not only the continuance of the same House of Com-
mons during such a period destroyed the connection
between the people and their representatives, and laid
open the latter, without responsibility, to the corrup-
tion which was hardly denied to prevail ; but the pri-
vilege of exemption from civil process made needy and
worthless men secure against their creditors, and de-
sirous of a seat in Parliament as a complete safeguard
to fraud and injustice. The term of three years ap-
peared sufficient to establish a controul of the electoral
over the representative body, without recurring to the
ancient and inconvenient scheme of Annual Parlia-
ments, which men, enamoured of a still more popular
form of Government than our own, were eager to
recommend. A Bill for this purpose was brought into
the House of Lords in Dec., 1689, but lost by the proro-
gation. It passed both Houses early in 1693, the Whigs
-generally supporting, and the Tories opposing it ; but
on this, as on many other great questions of this
reign, the two parties were not so regularly arrayed
against' each other as on points of a more personal na-
ture. To this Bill the KING refused his assent—an
exercise of prerogative which no ordinary circumstances
can reconcile, either with prudence, or with a consti-
tutional administration of Government. But the Com-
mons, as it was easy to foresee, did not abandon so
important a measure. A similar Bill received the
Royal Assent in November, 1694. By the Triennial
Bill it was simply provided that every Parliament
should cease and determine within three years from its
meeting. The clause contained in the Act of CHARLES
11. against the intermission of Parliaments for more
than three years is repeated ; but it was not thought
necessary to revive the somewhat violent, and perhaps
impracticable provisions by which the Act of 1641
had secured their meeting—it being evident that even
annual Sessions might now be relied upon as indispen-
sable to the machine of, Government. This annual
assembling of Parliament was rendered necessary, in
the first place, by the strict appropriation of the re-
venue' according to votes of Supply. It was secured,
next, by passing the Mutiny Bill, under which the
army is held together, and subjected to military disci-
pline for a short term, seldom or never exceeding
twelve months. These are the two effectual securities
against military power—that no pay can be issued to
the loops without a previous authorization by the
Commons in a Committee of Supply, and by both
Houses in an Act of Appropriation : and that no
officer or soldier can be punished for disobedience, or
any Court-martial held, without the annual re-enact-
ment of the Mutiny Bill. Thus it is strictly true
that, if the KING were not to summon Parliament
every year, his army would cease to have a legal exis-
tence ; and the refusal of either House to concur in
the Munity Bill, would at once wrest the sword out
of his grasp. By the Bill of Rights it is declared un-
lawful to keep any forces in time of peace, without
consent of Parliament. This consent, by an invariable
and wholesome usage, is given only from year to year ;
and its necessity may be considered, perhaps, the most
powerful of those causes which have transferred so
much, even of the executive power, into the manage-
ment of the two Houses of Parliament."
Thus the Whigs were no less the authors of the
Triennial Bill than of the Septennial Act ; and as it
cannot be denied that the latter was called for at the
time of its passing, by the dangers which threatened
the country, they ate only culpable in having hitherto
neglected every opportunity of repealing it. In 1773
the Common Council and Livery of London addressed
a circular to the electors throughout the country,
calling upon them to vote for no Member who
would not pledge himself to support the substitution of
Annual or Triennial Parliaments, for Septennial. Buy
the rotten Borough system was then in so flourishing
a state that the Reformers had no chance of success.
The Tories had the power in their own hands, and
therefore saw no reason for periling it by the removal
of an abuse with which they never failed to tax
the Whigs.
It is contended that the Septennial Act is more a
nominal than a teal grievance ; inasmuch Parliaments,
on an average, do not sit longer than four years.
This, to a certain extent, is correct ; but a number of
gross abuses, even in the exercise of the prerogative,
result from the power of Parliament to sit for seven
years. Thus, whenever a new Parliament evinces any
disposition to check the career of an obstinate Minis-
ter, his only hope is in a dissolution ; and thus the
country is plunged into a whirlpool of political excite-
ment, and candidates are ruined by accumulated ex-
penses : whereas, if Parliament were subject to disso-
lution at the expiration of three years, no such capri-
cious exercise of the prerogative would be recommended
by any Minister. While upon this point we think it
right to observe, that a clause ought to be in-
serted in the Triennial Bill, subjecting all future
Ministers to certain heavy responsibilities whouNevsotuioldn
advise his MAJESTY to dissolve Parliament, with-
out
better grounds for such a proceeding than a
desire to remain in office. In fact, the ci
asa d
toiss u how far Minionvisetreyrsinwstearne
cjou,sotiuhfigedt to be referred,
recommendingin
olthe commencement of the next Session, to a Committee
of the whole House.
The interim between this and the next bringing on of
the question in May, ought to be employed by the Re-
formers in pouring in petitions for the repeal of the Sep-
tennial Act. The Town Councils, in particular, ought
to bestir themselves. With Triennial Parliaments,
puri-
fied Corporations, and a Reform Bill, we may bid de-
fiance to despotism in every shape.

We copy from the Chronicle of this morning, in
our " Spirit of the Journals,
be given.
an article on the at-
tempt which Russia is now making to destroy the
trade of Western Europe with Wallachia and Mol-
davia, to which too much attention cannot h:
ven.
It will be seen that Russia seeks to effect this, like every
other act of aggression and treachery, by a pretext as
hollow as it is malignant--namely, the establishment
of quarantine harbours on the Danube.

The Paris Journals of Monday, the whole of
which
we have just received, do not contain any intelligence
of importance. They comment upon the debates in
the British Parliament on the civil war in Spain ; but
their conjectures are neither new nor interesting to the
great bulk of our readers. The advices from Bayonne
are to the 18th, and represent CORDOVA and EGUIA,
the former at -the head of 20,000 men, the latter
commanding 28 battalions, as engaged in watching
each other's movements! Of course their arms will
be only directed against stragglers and old women,
—fit foes for such generals. As for MINA, he is
gone on a " tour of observation through the Principa-