Star.
London, England, 1821-03-26 00:00:00

PARLIAMENTARY REFORM.

The last number of the Edinburgh Review, No.6e;
contains an article upon Parliamentary Reform, to.
which we are anxious to direct the attention of our
Readers. Although we cannot give to it our entire
and unqualified approbation, we are of opinion that
it is calculated to be of the most essential service,
There are few subjects on which more irritation pre-
vails than this of Reform, and an unimpassioned dis-
cussion of it is proportionably valuable. The article
before us is eminently such. It is written throughout
in a spirit of so much calmness and moderation as
must ensure the patient consideration of every reader;
and not in aq,ything proceeding from the eminent
person to whom report attributes k (Sir James
Mackintosh). have we seen stronger evidence of that
philosophic temper which so much conciliates oppo-
sition, and forms so great a contrast to the angry
vehenence of the turbulent and of the venal. Some
will perhaps deem that its views are not sufficiently
popular, and that ft wants somewhat of the ardour
and energy of a zealous and practical politician; but
even though we admit this to a certain extent, we
think that we .have in the indications of wariness,
and deliberation, and purity of intention, which it
everywhere bears,• an ample compensation.
From the origin of our Representat;ve System, and
several instances of direct interference with it which
he considers, the writer shews that a provision for its
modification, from time to time, as circumstances
may require, exists in the Constitution. After this
refutation of those who denounce all Reform as rash
and dangerous innovation, wholly unwarranted by
our usages, he proposes to himself certain conditions,
the fulfilment of which he thinks indispensable in
such a plan of Reform as it may be hoped would, if
not satisfy all parties, abate the hostility of all ; and
he concludes with certain propositions forming such
a plan. The conditions are, that the direct influence
of the People on the House of Commons be aug-
mented, that our other institutions be not endan-
gered, that all interference with the Representation
be strictly liMited to the known forms of the Con-
stitution, and to distinct and defined principles; and
the propositions made, in conformity to these con-
dikions,• are, that twenty Members be forthwith
added to the House of Commons, elected by popu•
lons and now unrepresented places, that all Boroughs
in •which gross corruption shall be proved be dis-
franchised,. and that the franchise in Scotland be

placed on a hioader basis. It is also proposed, that
• when by the disfranchisement of con upt Boroughs
the number of Menibirs shat be reduced to its pre-
sent amount, the franchise shall, in such cases of

deprivation as may afterwards'occur, be transferred
either to the larger Counties or Towns.
•Our 'first observation on this plan of ReforM is,
that it does not provide for a sufficient increase of
the power of the People. We are ready to concede,
that the influence of twenty additional independent
Members from populous towns would be. very ill
estimated by their numerical amount but. it seems
to have been wholly overlooked, that no small pro-
portion of those Members would be most certainly in
the interest of the Crown. At this hour, two of the
greatest towns in the Empire, Liverpool and Dublin,
return each two ginistertal Members. Bristol and
London each supply their quota to the Minister; West-
minster alone yields him no vote ; and the utmost
which reasonable people hope from any struggle of
the independent interest with Court patronage, under
circumstance, however favourable, is to divide the
Representation. The same remark must be made as
to the proposed alteration with reference to Scotland ;1
and it must be acknowledged to be very doubtful'
how far it would tend to strengthen the popular
party. With regard also to the future accession
which it would receive from the disfranchisement' of
corrupt Boroughs, and the transfer of their franchises
to Cities or Counties, it must be considered, that on
the utmost latitude of evidence which could he con-
ceded, it is only very seldom such a care of abuse
could be made out as would procure the disfran-
chisement; and by the consequent transfer, only a
chance of advantage is gained.
We mast then confess ourselves of opinion, that
the application of the principle of disfranchisemmt
to those cases only where corruption shall be evi,
&need by direct proof, would not supply a remedy
of the evils under which our Representative System
labours : and we must also avow, that we cannot
agree with the distinguished author of the article in
the Review, that on any grounds, whether of expe-
diency, or of the propriety of adhering to established
usages, disfranchisement is necessarily restricted to
such cases. It being admitted as a Constitutional
principle, that the Representation may need altera-
tion, we cannot deem it reasonable to fetter so strictly
the discretion by which such alteration is to be de.
termined, inasmuch as it is not possible to thre,ee
how far circumstances may change, and therefore
hem much of the system may need alteration.
la point of fact, the evil of the present day pre-
sents the strongest possible contrast to that which
Itrevailed during the earlier periods of our bistory.
It was then difficult to select a sufficient number of
phice% of importance and wealth enough to return.
Members; but though it •is now acknowledged
that our house of Representatives is as large as is
at all compatible with the discharge of its functions
as a deliberative Assembly, some of the most consi-
derable towns -remain wholly unrepresented, and

many large districts very inadequately. To remedy
the evil of their day, our ancestors indulged them-
selves in an unrestricted latitude; and for the return
Metnbeis to each successive Parliament, thine
towns which, at the particular juncture were judged
best able, were selected without any vaip attempt to
make the franchise stable and permanent. Can it,
then, be held that if we proceeded to renovate the
system in the same spirit with which it was origi-
nated, we should hesitate to transfer the franchise,
for example, from Old Sarum to Manchester I The
pi active of disfranchisement, on any terms, and in
any case, is of a date so recent, and the instances of
it so few, that we cannot consider they supply a
precedent to which .it would be reasonable strictly
to coliSiie ourselves. Tht question seems to us alto-
gether open as fir as they are concerned. It is,
'however, contended that, in ancient times, no re.
gard ream to have been paid to population, and that
the Legislature appears to have &sired, not that all
men, but that alt 011411111* shavld be reptesen'ted. TO
aubetentiet• these position% the preamhles of as Sia.

totes which et:Owed_ the troaise out the county
and city of Durham, andeounty and city of Chester,
are. cited, And soma inferences dodged from their
language, which we must charactens* savouring
no little of special pleading. If, by die:word classes,
the writer 'meuns. to distinguish between the inhabi-
tants of the country and of the town—the agricultu-
ral and trading interest—and, if he means to repre-
sent the object of our ancestors to have been, that
each of those interests should be represented in Par-
liament, we are entirely of his opinion. But we fear
that many persons will wrest the expression, which
is, perhaps,' not the most unequivocal that might
have been used, to a recognition and sanction of Mr.
Cantsism's most sophistical arguments and repre-
sentations. As to the first position, that no regard
seems to have been paid to population, we will at
least say, that no evidence of it is given: nothing
which the article contains appears to us to warrant
the statement. But the author himself, though he
objects to the principle of populadon being admitted
as a measure of the right of retaining the franchise,
adopts it in his own plan as a reasonable measure of
the capacity for receiving it: that is, although he
will not have the franchise conferred on any places
of a less population than fifteen thousand souls,, and'
thus admits that it is wrong such places should have
it, yet he will have Old Sarum, in' all its desolation,
to retain its franchise. We cannot see why the same
criteron should not be established for disfranchise-
ineot as enfranchisement ; or why, if sufficiently de.
terminate for the one, it .is not for the other. Yet
no objection to the adoption of the principle of dis-
franchisement is urged.with more confidence than
this of the necessity it would lay us under of resort-
ing to population as a rule of. practice, which the
author represents to be necessarily so indefinite, that
it would lead to an infringement of one of his ante-
cedent and fundamental. conditions. It is also con-
tended, that it tends to enhance the dignity of the de-
mocratic part of our Constitution to regard the elec-
tive franchise in the light of a personal right, and to
preserve it to its possessors with equal scrupulosity.
But, to our apprehension, the House of Commons
would be an Assembly of far greater dignity if
chosen by the body of the People, than it at present
is, and the privilege of voting for the election of its
Members would be then one of a much more exalted
nature than that now possessed by any close corporation.
The strongest argument which could be advanced
in favour of a Reform so exceedingly narrow as that
proposed, is that there is a greater probability of ob-
taining it than any more wide or better. But we
doubt whether even it be sound. 11. e have some-
times thought, that if the great 'Whig proprietary
could be brought to consent to the disfranchisement
of all such places, when theme can be no likelihood
or possibility of an honest and independent exercise
of the francaise, not all the venality and corruption
of the present system could present a bar Jo it. If'
Lord, John Russell comedown to the House of Com-
mons with a motion for the disfranchisement of his
father's boroughs, the popular voice would demand
a change of measures in a tone so imperative, that
itot even the present Ministers could dare to disre-
gard it. We firmly believe that such a line of con-
duct on the part of the Whigs would save the coon.
try. If the close boroughs were universally disfrant
chised, the great proprietors would resort to the peo-
ple for that strength which those boroughs cannot
give them; property would then have its legitimate
influence, and•the Aristocracy, thus allied to and in-
separable from the People, would afford a due equi-
' poise to the power of the Crown. We are no advo-
cates of Universal Suffrage or Annual Parliaments
we desire that the franchise be placed on a liberal
' basis, and we desire that it be so placed universally.
We are well aware of the value of the Aristocratical
part of the Constitution, but we do not think its
power now rests on a sound basis; and in the change
we contemplate, we entertain no
.apprehensions tor
its preservation, but hold a most confident persuasion
char it would be strengthened and augmented. The
present system, it is well said, has had a fair trial,
and in proportion to the magnitude of. the evils it
has entailed upon the con ntry, must he the extent of
the alteration 'needed, We must not flatter oorselves
that any small increase of the force of public 90-
' Ilion will be sufficient ; it is not the share it would
have, and it could only have a share, in the selection
of twenty additional Members, or the remote contiao
gency-of an additional unit in the numbegof.oppo-
sition, arising from the disfranchisement of a corrupt
borough, that will either Aitisfy or secure the country.
To the author of the article we comment upon. the
acknowledgments of every friend of Reform are due
for the ability with which he has deduced the right
of interference with the Representation ; but, white
•we consider his argument complete and decisive
against those who deny it, we cannot deem him
equally successful against those who demand its free
and unrestricted exercise. So much clamour about
the sanctity and inviolability of our institutions, in
all their parts, bas been raised, that a no ineobsider-
'able class of persons, we believe, 'are actually int-
, pressed with the idea that close boroughs, and all
they have, descended to us precisely as they now
exist from remote antiquity : a much more consider-
able class forget that human wit has never been able
to provide against the effects of time upoo, its esta-
blishments: in this world, all is change, nothing is
stable or permanent. It is therefore impossible to
devise any scheme of Government which shall pro-
duce the same effects at different periods. It is' 4se
true, that in various stages of civilization,.the J?eople
must be endowed with various degrees of cos troul
over theis rulers: upon this subject Mr. Tieroey ha;
more than once observed in the HOW; of Commons,
that the practice-of fifty yea* since, when the trans.
actions of the Legislature Were darkly detailed under
Roman names, when newspapers wire few and poli-
tical knowledge scanty, will not serve for tile present
day, when so general an illumination of mind hos
taken place when intelligence is transmitted to t
remotest h;mlet with a velocity only proportionate
Ito the impatience with which it is leaked for ; and
where, in the humblest ranks of life, are heard dis-
cussions of every measure which occopies the atten-
tion of our statesmen. It is manifgst that public
opinion has acquired a better title to at ion, and
must rotative it.

In coucksino, we are desirire st-entesing
test against the dbctrine that in each case we are to'
meet to the eanduct dour aneastors fits thepuspi4a
aF learniag the Constitutionelwaege. filtay
`marked, that it is absurd to talb atilt 10404 W 16.4-1

taion if as a regular plan of liberty prior to the Revolu-
tion." Is it in the angry rebukes of. Elizabeth, or the
threats of her father to the Commons, that we are to
find precedents for the becoming Address of the So.
vereign to the People? or is it to those times when so
monstrous an evil as that the great county of Chester
and that of Durham should be unrepresented was to-
lerated, that we are to revert for our direction att this
day ? Can we expect, in the Statutes which; for the
first time, bestowed the franchise on those districts,
any nice or accurate allotment of it ? We are of
opinion, that a better notion of the Constitution will
be formed by consulting the comments on it by those
authors, to the accuracy and purity of whose concep-
Aious that spirit of freedom which we nourish in our
breasts bears testimony, than by any narrow and ex-
clusive examination of single acts of our ancestors.—
.In truth, no man can fix a period when the Constitu-
tion existed in entirety and purity : can we then be
reasonably restricted to the precedent of any particu-
lar period ? It is only the great and fundamental
principles of the Constitution which are stable and
permanent s the modification of the Representative
System from time to time is one of those, but there
exist no certain rules by which that modification is
to be directed. Our usages are many of them con-
flicting, and a rigid adherence to precedent, without
the controul of any discretion, would be productive
of the worst effects. But with what propriety are we
to be interdicted the application of a Suitable remedy,
where an evil has grown to such a pitch as to require
it, merely because it has not been applied before?
In fine, we will cite, in confirmation of our view-
of the subject, a passasze from one of those works
which stand highest in are estimation of Englishmen:
As trade is of a fluctuating nature, and seldom
long tiled in one place, it was formerly left to the'
Crown to summon, pro re /AM, the most flourishing
towns to send kept esentatives to Parliament. So that
as towns increaned in trade and grew populous, they
were admitted to a share in the Legislature. But the
misfortune is, that the deserted Boroughs continue to
be summoned."—Blacksione's Cont. rol. 1,1). 174.

CLANDESTINE iIi.4IIIII.4GES.

NORTHUMBERLAND ASSIZES, MARCH S.

Thomas Nichohon was indicted for bigamy.
Mr. Sergeant Caoss said, the prisoner had followed
the profession of a schoolmaster. About six years
ago he resided in the county of, Durham, where he
became acquainted with a Miss Isabella Ferguson.
But as it seemed the formalities of 'that county were
of too frigid a nature fur therspeedy completion of
their happiness, they agreed to betake themselves into
Scottand, wliere the ceremony of mattimony is attended
with greater facility. Finding itdifficult to meet with
employment in the profession he had choien, he was
obliged to remove into this county, leaving his wife
behind. Still he corresponded with her, and acknow-
ledged her as his bride. At length he was employed
by a Gentleman of the name of Rowell to instruct his
grand-daughter; his attention to his charge proved,
alas! too powerful: he seduced her affections—she
became pregnant, and he married her also! lf, there-
fore, the circumstances-slumld be proved in evidence
as he had stated them, it became the duty of the Jury
to find the prisoner guilty; if not, to acquit him.
William Short,l am a labourer„ and Item in North Durham.
Three Of four years ago the prisoner resided at Ilarhurnrig, in
the parish of Cornhill ; it is about two miles froth Coldstream.
bridge. I remember going with him, Isabella Ferguson, Jane
Ferguson, and anot7..er to Coldstream): it was pat! the 10th
of October, four year; since. We went to the house elope Arm-
strong, which is on the North side, and In Scotland. One Mu-
die was sent for, and the prisoner made a bargain with him about
marrying them. Mudie asked the prisoner if he was willing to
take Isabella Ferman " as his lawful, wedded wife?" Ile said,
" Nludie asked her if she was willing to take him " as
her lawful, wedded husband?" She also said, " Yes."—There
was a marriage certificate made out. After. the ceremony, all
returned to my. house: they then went home to her father's
house and lived there a fortnight, more or less. The prisoner
then left that part of the country: lee did not tell me for wkat
reason. I believe the marriage certificate produced to be signed
by the prisoner. I was myself married in Scotland t. I carried
my own Priest along with me—he was an Eigfish Dissenting
Cleigymart. _ _ _

cieiwatamined by Mr. Loss.-11*-was nos a Clergyman of the
01,iisch of Scotland : his name was William Sewers. I don't know
what Mudic is : he is not a Clergyman, nor a tailor: he professes
uothing but marrying people. I never saw the prisoner but once
•aiter the marriage.
firastridesti ltg 44. Sf ride* Cross.—The prisoner often asked
me to go to Coklatroam to be a witness. I don't know whether
Moak is a Clergyman or not. I think Isabella Ferguson wail
about *suntan.
Jane Pryborough, sister of Isabella Ferguson, was present at
the marriage of her sister and the prisoner and described the
ceremony like the last witness: it took place ten at night, and
the parties stopped all night at Short's.
Crum-examined by Mr. I.mie.—The witness's father and mocha
did
not know of the marriage till after it, took place. I did not
learn of my father and maker that they knew of the marriage,
even when they did comeback. Medic wrote the lines for the
marriage: I, dunot think he was drunk. I never lived at my
father's after the marriage. The prisoner lived at Harburnrig,
and kept a school there: he left the country after the marriage.
I saw him about a year after, at harvesminae; he came to see his
wife. I signed the certificate at the wedding..
W. Short, being recalled, identified his signature to the certi-
*eine: he bad melte certificate when he was married.
Mr.*Thoinas Shortree.-4 am a writer in Jedburgh. lam
Procurator-Fiscal for the County of Emburgh : the duty of that
ofike is to prosecute for all criminal masters. I have heard the
accounts given by the witnesses, and I think the marriage a legal
marriage. The regular way in Scotland is first to proclaim baons
r in the parish where the parties reside, three saccasive Sundays,
afterwards a certificate ie made out by the Clerk of the Pari4h,
whoa procleirns the banns. There are three ways of celebrating
tuarnages clandestinely ; and I consider this one of them. I con-
ceive, that to make a marriage valid in Scotland, ft is only neces-
sary for the parties to appear before a Magistrate or other era
dible witness, and declare themselves to be man and wide. I have
nistkoold thiaris =eche= to constikete a bailing marriage. Er.
skioe's honk on. Stanch UM dam ofiachtlowledged authority.—
[llse Camel for the prosecution here read a passage, stating,
that " it is not aecetsary that a marriage should be celebrated
by a Clergyman: It Is sallelent to be attested before • Magis-
trate, or ether mak witnessesl
reetaseasiewsi, hit Me. Lossa.--1-faund my opinion upon what
I knnw to be tlw practice of the Law Of Scotland.. as wen as '
what I front law books, I have never had any practice
en this abject:
W. Short neafied.—The prisoner and his wife went to bed
at my ham OR she OA& of ti* marriage: they slept to sepa-
rate beds. I live .between three and four miles from the father's
house: I was net at the father's house during the fortnight el.
luded to--f Three late/lima the prisoner, dated Corbridge, and
calling Isabella nettle= hiss dear wife," were put in did read./
• Mr. Serjeant Cnoss cited a case somewhat analo-
gous, • and was proceeding to argue, that as the law
of Scotland did not forbid marriages like the present,
•
it must =melon them, when

Mr. Justice BAITAT observed to the Jury, that as
they had failed in proving the consummation of the
first marriage, they could not punish the prisoner for
la second marriage, and he was of course acquitted..