The Sun.
London, England, 1848-06-19 00:00:00

office of President of the Council at Madrid had
changed hands twenty-nine times, and had been held
in succession by twenty-seven different personages ;
and seeing, moreover, that between October, 1832,
and October, 1847, the office of Minister for Foreign
Affairs had changed bands thirty-seven times, and
had been held successively by no less than
thirty-two different diplomatists ! Secondly, the
Spanish Government stated that during the
insurrection of the 26th of March, the house of the
British Legation had been the asylum and the rally-
ing point of the conspirators ; and secondly, Lord
PALMERSTON counter-stated that the official residence
of Sir H. BULWER had not been the rallying point of
revolt, and that as to its having afforded shelter to
the unfortunate, that was a practice of universal and
continual recurrence, and one which had hitherto
received the acquiescence of every Government, not
excepting the Government of her Alost Catholic
MAJESTY. In addition to this, the British Minister
reminded Senor ISTURITZ of the circumstances of his
having himself in 1836 obtained shelter at the
British Legation, Lord CLARENDON, then Mr. VIL-
LIERS, being at the time ambassador ; of SALAMANCA,
of ZARCO DEL VALLE, and of SOTOMAYOR himself
obtaining in 1843 similar protection at the Danish
Legation, the Spanish Government subsequently
commemorating the fact by conferring upon the
Danish Charge d' Affaires the distinguished title of
the Baron del Asilo. Thirdly, the Spanish Govern-
ment proclaimed the culpability of Sir H. BULWER
in having formed an intimate friendship with the
family of an officer engaged in the revolt at Seville ;
and thirdly, Lord PALMERSTON asserted that the
assumption of any power over the friendships
formed by an Ambassador at any Court in
Christendom, by the Ministers of that Court,
was one of the most odious of the many odious pre-
tensions of tyranny. Fourthly, the Spanish Govern-
ment insisted that the mission of Colonel FITCH was
for the purpose of promoting insurrection ; and,
fourthly, Lord PALMERSTON insisted, on the contrary,
that that mission had reference simply and solely to the
protection of the British interests in the southern
ports of the Peninsula. Fifthly, the Spanish Go-
vernment argues that because Mr. SANSOM (the Di-
rector of the Union Bank of Madrid) was an intimate
friend of Sir 11. BULWER, and had been known to
speak disparagingly of NARYAEZ and his coadjutors,
therefore his Excellency was favoured with the re-
quisite passports ; and, fifthly, Lord PALMERSTON
laughs that argument to scorn, as preposterously un-
proven and insufficient. Sixthly, it is declared by
the Spanish Government that the final reason for the
dismissal of Sir H. BULWER originated in an anxiety
for his personal safety from assassination ; and sixthly,
Lord PALMERSTON destroys this monstrous effort at
extenuation by vindicating the citizens of Madrid
from this unjustifiable calumny. From the failure of
these specious excuses has arisen the last act in the
drama of Spanish dissensions—we mean the sudden
dismissal of his Excellency Senor XAVIER DE
ISTURITZ. How far this denouement must ultimately
tend to advance the interests, not only of Great Britain,
but likewise of the Spanish and Portuguese penin-
sula, will be clearly and readily explained hereafter.

The important motion, of which the veteran
JOSEPH HUME, the consistent, energetic, and uncom-
promising Reformer of nearly 40 years, has given
notice, will at length, we trust, receive that full dis-
cussion, that calm and attentive consideration which
its vast importance so fully merits, and to which the
anxious wishes of the vast majority of the industrial
classes throughout the entire country in its favour so
eminently entitle it. Although in common with the
great body of Reformers we regretted that a question
of such general interest should, under any circum-
stances, have been postponed to so late a period of the
session, we felt that the Honourable Member for
Montrose was fully justified in refusing to bring the
subject forward at a late hour in the evening, when
the House was wearied from its preceding labours,
and when it would have been impossible to bring
forward in detail the various facts bearing
strongly upon the point, and incontrovertibly esta•
blishing the justice and propriety of the contemplated
measures. if any doubt could then have existed as
to the sagacity of the Hon. Member in pursuing such
a course it would be completely removed by the
magnificent demonstrations which have taken place
in so many districts, and which must have already
removed the delusion under which the Premier
laboured on the 23d of May last, when he asserted
that the middle and working classes of the country
desired neither one great reform or the other—that
they were anxious neither for the people's Charter
nor for the great plan of reform, which came near the
Charter, proposed by the Hon. Member for Mon-
trose." In the interval the popular voice has been
expressed, temperately but fairly, and whatever
difference may now exist as to the expediency of
an immediate alteration of the law, there cannot be
the slightest doubt that the people are not liatlAeir
with the present state of affairs ; that with Mr. HOME
they declare " that the House of Commons as at
present constituted does not fairly represent the po-
pulation, the property, or the industry of the coun-
try, whence has arisen great and increasing discon-

ent in the minds of a large proportion of the people."

The constitutional theory is " that there should be
no taxation without representation ;" in other words,
" that every person who, in any degree, contributes
to the national income, should have a voice, by him-
self or his representative, in the national ex-
penditure, and also in the mode by which
the Exchequer may be replenished." This is
the just and equitable theory, but what is
the practice ? Under the present system of

indirect taxation every individual who is not
a pauper obtaining parochial assistance, is compelled
to apply a considerable portion of his earnings in pay-
ment of the imposts levied upon articles of the first
necessity in daily consumption in his family. If,
therefore, such a person, in accordance with the prin-
ciple to which we have referred, might justly claim
the elective franchise a fortiori, every householder,
who not only contributes directly to the national exi-
gencies, but is also rated for the relief of his more
impoverished and destitute brethren, in respect
of the tenement which he occupies, should possess a
similar privilege.

How many householders, however, throughout the
entire country are left unrepresented, ex U7lO disco omnes.
A petition which appears in another part of our im-
pression this day, and of the accuracy of which we
are assured on the most unquestionable authority, sets
forth, "that there are in the town of Thorne and
Thorne Quay 570 householders rated to the relief of
the poor, and that there are only 87 of such house-
holders qualified by law to vote for Members of
Parliament, leaving above five-sixths of such house-
holders totally unrepresented in the Commons House
of Parliament," and "that among such unrepresented

householders there are three ministers of the Gospel,
five schoolmasters, and four attorneys-at-law, and
that among the 87 electors there is neither an attor-
ney-at-law, a minister, nor a schoolmaster, except the
clergyman of the Established Church." If, then,
Thorne affords a fair example of the state of other
towns throughout the entire kingdom, is it strange
that a general feeling of indignation should prevail
at the system by which so many persons are de-
frauded of their rights, and prevented from exercising
that control in the government of the country which
is the privilege of a free-born man unstained by
crime ?