The Sun.
London, England, 1867-05-31 00:00:00

matter it is high time that more decisive measures
be adopted, and nothing is more likely to prove
effectual than a total disfranchisement of the
boroughs which are so corrupt. Mr. GLADSTONE said
distinctions should not be drawn between large and
small communities, and the larger ones are at pre-
sent without the check which, to some degree, ope-
rates upon the smaller ones. The small ones know
that if they are corrupt they will be disfranchised.
"'Where is the man who will:stand up for Totncs?"
asked the right hon. gentleman amid some laughter,
and concluded by declaring, in emphatic terms, that
the House should bear in mind the considerations he
had alluded to, and give the Government credit for
what they had done in the matter.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer gave very good
reasons for the course which the Ministry had pur-
sued, and assured the House that they did not de-
cide hastily, but arrived at the decision unani-
mously, believing " that it was justified by sound
policy, and sanctioned by Constitutional precedent."
The right honourable gentleman denied the asser-
tion of Mr. BRIGHT that the Government had been
influenced in their arrangements by reason of the
enfranchisement proposed for other places. Some
of the observations of the right hon. gentleman are
especially deserving of attention when he referred
to the results of general elections. He declared
that " bribery and corruption" really affected very
little the course of political affairs ; and the more
he thought on such matters the more he became
convinced that " bribery and corruption, although
they might be very convenient for gratifying
the vanity and ambition of individuals, had very
little effect upon the fortunes of parties, and it was
a great mistake to suppose that they were the means
by which power could either be attained or retained."
The large majority which declared for the preamble
of the Chancellor of the Exchequer was the more
satisfactory, because, as the right hon. gentleman
said, the effect of disfranchising these boroughs would
be materially injured if it was seen that only the
influence of party had carried it, and that the de-
cision had not been come to by the unanimous feel-
ing of the House on the subject. We can see no
reason whatever why these boroughs should not be
disfranchised, and it is earnestly to be hoped that
the stringent measures thus adopted will
have due weight with the community, and
deter other places from following
.the example
of those doomed boroughs. Before the division
upon the preamble took place, Mr. BRIGHT made a
proposal which was generally disapproved of. He
considered that the bill should be cut in two, and
that the franchise part should be sent up to the
House of Lords, and thus afford more time to the
House of Commons to proceed with deliberation in
the question of redistribution. This would never
do, though no doubt the honourable mem-
ber for Birmingham meant well in his
proposal, and at any rate he showed that he was
anxious to get the bill forwarded. After the
many drawbacks which Reform has met with, it is
indeed encouraging to .dear of the notion of its
being discussed in the Upper House at all. Now
that Mr. GLADSTONE and Mr. BRIGHT have so far
come round to the measure of the Government, we see
no reason why very rapid progress should not be made
and the affair satisfactorily disposed of without the
session being a very protracted one. Mr. MILLS'
scheme for the representation of minorities was
briefly discussed last night, but the hon. member
subsequently withdrew his amendment. We think
that the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER took the
fairest view of the question, when he said that, as
this subject must be discussed. in the future, it was
as well that the House of Commons should have it
inaugurated by a man of so much eminence as the
hon. member for Westminster. On the whole Mr.
MILL did not meet with discouragement, which is
so far fortunate, and there is much to be said on
his side of the question, even if it be admitted that
there are more against than for it as yet.

We are glad to find that the commissioners ap
pointed to inquire into the pollution of rivers, &c.

have recommended, with regard to our water
supply in towns, that it should be made compulsory
to adopt the constant system. So manifest are the
individual advantages and public benefits secured
by the adoption of this method that it is only
surprising such a recommendation should not
have been made and enforced long since. The
medical officers and others best acquainted with the
necessities and grievances of the labouring classes
in our over-poptflated city have over and over again
insisted on the necessity of a thorough change in
the manner of the supply. The quality of the
water is for the most part greatly improved of late
years, and we profited by this during the laat visita-
tion of cholera. The quantity, however, still affords
matter for just complaint. The very brief time
during which the water is pumped into many of the
houses in poor and populous districts, its total stop-
page on Sunday, and the insufficiency of the recep-
tacles for storing it, all tend to promote dirt an d
squalor, as well as seriously to interfere with the
sanitary condition of the place. The water for
I cooking, as for drinking, is obliged to be used
out of some open vessel kept standing all day,
perhaps all night, in a small crowded room. The
effect on the drainage is, of course, very bad, and
between bad smells and bad water, or not enough
of good water, cholera and fever, and every othei
epidemic
_and endemic, have easy work of it. A
letter has been addressed to a contemporary, by
a surgeon living in one of our populous eastern
parishes. He states that he has under his care
a district of 15,000 souls. In two streets
of the district there are now, he states, no less
than forty cases of small-pox. In each house there
are four families, amounting in many cases to 16 or
18 people. " Not a house has n hogshead of water
for all these, and that only for six days. Sunday
is a day of rest for the poor people, and conse-
quently one of dirt for the poor people." How is
it to be wondered at, he asks, not unnaturally, that
these poor people suffer from illness throughout the
year And if in ordinary seasons disease is rife
and deaths numerous, how much more must this be
the case when cholera is prevalent? During the
late outbreak of the dreaded epidemic, Mr. GARRETT
tells us the two streets he refers to were under. his
special charge, and that Death was busy in almost
every house, in many instances striking down his
victim with lightning speed. A powerful remedy for
these evils would, in Mr. GARRETT'S Opinion —and, _
indeed, in the opinion of most sanitary reformers—
would be found in the constant supply of good
water, and he charges the landlords to see to it
before the summer sets in. There is little hope,
however, that landlords will, as a ruh., do anything
of the kind unless they are compelled by Act of
They ar,3 by no weans fond of incur-
ring what they deem unnecessary expense,

Parliament

especially if the benefit is to be exclusively their
tenants. It is never very difficult to find tenants fo

either rooms or houses in the busy parts of London,
more especially, perhaps, in those thronging eastern
districts where all these grievances press so heavily.
If .one family complains and leaves, another will
soon fill the vacant room, but indeed few poor
people would be Quixotic enough to move
on such an account. They are accustomed to
putting up with deficiencies of this sort, and
very often their own ignorance renders them corn-