Star.
London, England, 1830-06-23 00:00:00

the transactions of the Senate transpired only in brief
notices, or such reports as the personal vanity of the
speakers made public. We have next a period when
imperfect, and something like continuous reports,
were given in the periodical publications ; but when,
strange to say, an imprimatur appeared to have existed
against the names of the speakers ; and when, therefore,
lit became the privilege of the Members to be nick-named
according to the taste, or party, or malevolence of the
publisher. Then it was that a SEJANUS brought forth his
motions on national finance—a Vett RES his motions on
Colonial Government—and even, in one publication, a
Tit ER S ITES was represented as standing forth the cham-
pion of his King. On the other side of the house, we meet
an A ats•rt DFS enacted by some City Alderman—a E-
berocLes by some old gouty General, and a Gin-
e! NNATUS under the plain garb of what is called, and
once was known to exist, a mere country gentleman.
This state of privilege existed many years; and, we
believe, but we are speaking only from memory, it was
about the earliest years of the last reign, that
Publishers had sufficient courage to relinquish the nick-
naming system in favour of the initial ono.—This was
11 certainly a step towards improvement, and soon intro-
duced the present mode of giving the whole names of
the speakers ; but still it was not for many years that
the auditors were allowed any other facility of correctly
carrying away what they beard, than that of the full
liberty of using their own ears and memories ; and with
wonderful memories the public wore soon supplied. It
is well known the singular and truly surprising powers
of a WOO D ALL—who, we have been assured by a Gen-
tleman of great veracity who witnessed the fact—abso-
lutely came home from the Parliament House to Salisbnry-
square, on the longest debate which ever took place on
the motion of Mr. WII.BERFORCE, on the Slave Trade,
and.discharged his ex traordinarily capacious memory of the
whole solid contents of a Morning Paper, which immedi-
ately went to the press. We have now nearly brought our
historical sketch on this subject down to modern times and
modern privileges, which, within the recollection of many,
commenced by an honourable winking at smuggled notes,
and has terminated in regular short-hand reporting.

A curious question arises—what could have occasioned
a people, so justly celebrated for plain, practical, busi-
ness-like intellect as the British, making such a slow
progress in the obtaining privileges which really were
most important to the national interests ? The answer,
we are afraid, must be, that the privileges in question
were subversive of the corruption of the House, as em-
ployed in support of the corruptions of Government, and
were only slowly and reluctantly relinquished—or rather
conquered—by the individual interests and personal va-
nities of the Honourable Members—not, we are sorry to
say—their public spirit gaining advantage over the ob-
jects of existing Administrations.
We are certainly now at a period of parliamentary
history when we sincerely believe there really exists a
much larger portion of public spirit in Parliament, and
when the true vox populi is more heard through the voice
of the people's representatives, than at any former time ;
but still, it would seem, that it is really more to per-
sonal feelings of Honourable Members, than to any
more reputable cause, that we are to be indebted
for any farther progress we are to expect on
this subject ; for the dictates of common sense
still declare, that a farther progress on this point is
essential to the interests of the nation, and to its charac-
ter among the other civilized nations of the world.

What is the situation of our privileges on this point
now ? The absurd orders of the House still exist as to
the prohibition of reporting—but reporting is ad-
mitted—and it is even avowed, and well known,
that the order of the House, if carried into exe-
cution, would, like all instances of irrational le-
gislation, prove, scorpion-like, its own destroyer.—
The public have been used to a privilege which
cannot be taken from them. The next question
is, whether it be wise to allow them this privilege in
a way to be advantageous or mischievous to the parties
interested.

We are truly astonished at observing that the accom-
modations which Colonel SIBTHORPE would extend to
Reporters, and which are well known indispensable for
the accomplishment of their duties, are considered by an
able, judicious, and independent Journal, to be un-
necessary. It must be obvious that if Reports of Par-
liamentary Debates are to be made, the truth of those
reports become of great importance to the Honourable
Speakers, and of great importance likewise to their
representatives; and it must be well known to every
Reporter, that under present restrictions, truth
cannot always be accomplished, even with the most
anxious regard directed towards that object. We are
not inclined to believe that wilful and malevolent motives
have often been suffered to pervert reporters from an
honest discharge of duty —still less that any conductor of
a Journal would encourage such improper partialities;
—but it is well known to every person connected with the
British Press, that such means of malevolent gratification
and base partiality, are in the power of the Reporter ;
and we really think it is of vital importance to every
Hon. Member, that such a dangerous power of doing
mischief, and inflicting personal punishment on those who
value the public regard, should not be suffered longer to
exist. It surely is inconsequential logic to maintain,
that because we cannot, as conductors of newspapers,
furnish the public with all that has been said in a de-
bate, that it is advantageous to keep us from the means
of knowing all. By knowing all that has, taken place
we have the power at least of communicating nothing
that is false ; and is not that essential both to the
speakers and to the public ? It is well known, that under
any extension of accommodation, we must abridge: but
then we can, and should, abridge with integrity, and an im-
partial regard to truth. Whatever may be the interests
of the public Press, the public and the Honourable
Members are two other parties to the question, whose
interests should be consulted on the subject.