The Sun.
London, England, 1848-06-23 00:00:00

. ,
oftinng Anto

LONDON, FRIDAY, JUNE 23, 1848.

True to his character as leader of the Opposition,
Lord STANLEY is perpetually endeavouring to em-
barrass the Government by popping questions of the
most exquisite delicacy to the Marquis of LANS-
DOWNR. We quarrel not with this circumstance ;
on the contrary, we are always disposed to congratu-
late ourselves upon the collision of sentiment between
the Opposition and the Cabinet, seeing that from that
very collison arises the solution of many official
enigmas, and the threading of many diplomatic laby-
rinths. Distressing as this Parliamentary catechism
may be to the members of the Administration, it is
eminently delightful and satisfactory as far as the
general population is concerned ; for by this means
the curtain is partially raised, the darkness is for the
moment dissipated, and, in spite of all the obstructions
raised against curiosity by the Executive, casual
glimpses are obtained into the very sanctuary of the
Government. Admirable, however, as these results
are, it is impossible not to recognise the factious an-
tagonism in which they very frequently originate;
and of this excessively troublesome inquisitiveness
we conceive Lord STANLEY to be repeatedly and
peculiarly guilty. Look, for example, at the inquiry
—the superfluous, and, at the same time, in a Parlia-
mentary sense, the absolutely indelicate inquiry—put
Yesterday evening by the Noble Lord to the Marquis
of LANSDOWNE. After the candid and reiterated
explanations made officially in both Houses of Par-
liament, by the Lord President of the Council, by the
Principal Secretary for the Foreign Department, and
by the First Lord of the Treasury ; after the publi-
cation of the entire correspondence, firstly, between
Sir Hmvar LYTTON BULWER and the Duque Ds So-
TOMAYOR, and secondly between Senor XATIER DB
ISTIIRITZ and Viscount PALMERSTON—it is surely
rather late in the day to quibble about the non-recep-
tion of Count MIRASOL in his unaegedited capacity.
As Lord PALMERSTON himself observed; in one of his
masterly letters to the Spanish Ambassador, it was
scarcely the most reasonable moment to look for the
reception of an additional or supplementary emissary
to the Court of St. James's, when the British Ambas-
sador was being dismissed from Madrid in a manner
so peculiarly contumelious, if not so entirely and
monstrously unprecedented. And yet the
Noble Leader of the Opposition insinuates
his wrath in open Parliament because, for-
sooth, the Ministerial advisers of Queen VICTORIA
objected not only to bow submissively before the

insolence of SOTOMAYOR, but also to give a vivid
evidence of their meekness by kissing the rod of
their insulter, and by humbling themselves to the dust
in the presence of his Iberian audacity. Remem-
bering the speech delivered last evening by Lord
STANLEY, it is to us a thought of profound satisfac-
tion that the glory and the dignity of Great Britain
in regard to its foreign relations is not in the keeping
of the heir to the Earldom of. Derby, but that it is
in the hands of that distinguished statesman who,
after thirty years, has preserved the consistency of
his reputation by maintaining, at all hazards, the
character of England.
Now that all diplomatic relations have ceased, how-
ever, between the two countries, we are not disposed
to revive again this exceedingly wearisome misunder-
standing. The position and prospects of the unfortu-
nate land at present under the iron rule of NARvaEz
will always afford a nobler theme for investigation.
And that theme we shall never abandon until the pre-
sent despicable and tyrannous Government of the
Peninsula is subverted, and a new policy introduced
to Madrid under novel and healthier auspices.
From the impartial Progresista already quoted so
often by ourselves, froin the pamphlet of Don VICENTE
PEREDA, we glean this remarkable declaration (p. 62)
—" The ancient law is compatible with true liberty,
and is capable of accommodating itself to the exigen-
cies of the age—La antigua ley es compatible con la
libertad, y se puede acomodar a las exigencies de la
epoca." That is an important declaration, coming as it
does from the lips of a Progresista, from the lips of one
of that liberal party, one of that hopeful and progres-
sive party which is supposed by many (though most
erroneously so) to foster ideas of a prospective re-
public. And it is precisely because we have a full
appreciation of the importance of this assertion that
we are disposed to give a deliberate hearing to the
statements and arguments of its promulgator. At a
later and more opportune moment we shall
enter into these statements thoroughly, without
pinning down our credence to bare asseve-
rations, but with a readiness to give all
attention to the facts culled from history. Ulti-
mately, however, when the National party is formed
by the union of the honest men of the Moderados
and of the Progresistas, as was recommended by
EscosuxA, and as has been since enforced by
PEREDA, the truth or the fallacy of the assertion
that the ancient law of Spain is compatible with true
liberty, will become a consideration of the most vital
interest. The decision arrived at by that National
party upon the fact of that memorable sentence will
involve the rejection of the modern, or the revival of
the ancient, Constitution of the Spanish Peninsula.
To modify the exclamation of the Athenian—Dissent,
but hearken !

A new writ was on Wednesday directed to be
issued for the borough of Cheltenham,'and the House
last night made a similar order in the case of
Horsham. We trust that the change of sentiment
thus manifested, more particularly in the latter case,
may be indicative of the determination of the Legis-

!ature to take an enlarged and comprehensive view of

the subject, and to adopt such remedies as may not
only punish the parties who are actually guilty, but
may prevent the recurrence of similar acts of cor-
ruption to those which have been established
in evidence before the Committees of the
House. " Melius est, petere fontes quam sec-
, tari rivulos." It is more'snited to the dignity
of the Legislature to trace out the sources from
whence these evils have originated, to remove the
temptation to delinquency, to place the elective fran-
chise on a proper foundation, than to waste its time in
the investigation of trifling cases, and to terminate
its labours by removing a few isolated individuals
from the roll of electors, or even by the disfran-
chisement of a particular class. The principle of the
British law is that it "is better that ninety-
nine guilty persons should escape the punish-
ment due to their crimes than that one inno-
cent person should be unjustly convicted," and
public opinion has sanctioned and approved
the humane and equitable doctrine. The rule
would, however, be wholly reversed if many electors
whose conduct was beyond impeachment were to be
deprived of a highly prized constitutional privilege,
because some few of their neighbours had degraded
themselves by the acceptance of bribes or treats from
the candidates themselves, their agents or friends.
Parties should not be made responsible for acts in
which they did not in any degree participate.
It may be asked, then, would we permit cases of
gross corruption to remain unpunished, and the
character of the House of Representatives to be
lowered by even the suspicion that any of its mem-
bers had obtained admission by such unjust and infa-
mous means? Most assuredly not —we would
' punish most stringently both the briber and the
bribed, the tempter and the man who yielded to his
solicitations, in every case where it could be clearly
and unequivocally brought home to them. Let all
such persons be for ever deprived of the rights they
have abused, of the privileges of which they have
proved themselves to be unworthy; but do not im-
plicate others without full and just cause for their
punishment.

An efficient remedy, however, is not to be sought
in a reduction of the number of electors ; on the
contrary, a large addition should be made to the
number. New and healthy blood should be infused
' into the diseased constituencies sufficient to neutralise
the local influences which had previously operated
so injuriously. Enlarge the boundaries, add new and
hitherto- unrepresented districts to the existing
boioughs ; no injury will thereby be inflicted on
any. A monopoly may perhaps be abolished—a few
aristocratic families may no longer be able to send
their nominees to Parliament to record their
votes in obedience to the dictates of their
patrons. But can that be regarded as an
evil ? Is it not rather the object most to be
sought after? The more equal apportionment of elec-
toral districts asked for by the Honourable Member
for Montrose would bring back a healthy state of
affairs, and would remove the temptation to bribery
that now exists, while the adoption of the ballot
would render it perfectly useless to attempt such a
course, when there could be no security that the per-
son who was so base as to accept the wages of cor li
-
ruption, would not be vile enough afterwards to
betray
those who paid the degrading stipend. It is
ridiculous to say, that is an un-English habit.
Do not the wealthier classes in their own
immediate spheres adopt the practice ? How
are the members of the various clubs elected ?
Is it
not in accordance with the condemned and un-
English (1) principle ? We could, if necessary,
multiply instances, but cui Bono ? What is fit
for the wealthier classes cannot be improper for their
poorer brethren, to whom it would afford protection
from the coercion that has been too often exercised,
and at the same time provide the best guarantee
against every species of bribery and corruption.