The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1852-02-28
English Politics.

excite. lhey are conflned-as our telegTaphic
column showed yesterday-tu the reduction of
the franchise qualification in counties and bo-
roughs, the admission of new class of voters
qualified by payment of a certain amount of
taxes, the abolition of property qualification of
members of Parliament, and the extension of
certain small boroughs by draflings from the
neighboring inhabitants. The defect of the
measure is that which runs through Lord j. Rus
SELLS parliamentary history. 1t embraces no
new principle, and strikes at no great wrong.
1t retains the obnoxious principles of the
existing system Of representation, and so far
dsappoints and offends the more decided re-
formers; while, on the other hand, it NEEDLES
sufficiently with existing abuses to arouse the
fears and call forth the opposition of the old
Tory party. The radical principle of universal
suffrage is discarded, as well as the more con-
sentative principle of household or educational
franchise; the ballot, an essential adjunct to
electoral freedom, is passed over; and the vices
OF a system pregnant with corruption and abb
surdity, are perpetuated and enlarged, not cur
tailed. The abolition of property qualification
for MEMBERSHIP most meritorious part of the
schemes but an extension of what has long
been in operation in Scotland.
AS an illustration of the progress of the de-
mand for reform, in a country where all
changes are effected slowly and at long inter
walls, this new measure possesses interest out
side of her majesty's dominions. 1t is proof
of the continued operation of the influence
which has been often pointed to as the guaran-
ty of England's safety; although unfortunately
it at the same time proves that the statesmen
who twenty years ago undertook the task of
enlarging the boundaries Of popular power, are
not yet able to perceive the ultimate force of
clearly defined principles, or still lack courage
to emancipate themselves from the formula Of
makeshifts and the low promptings of expedi-
ency.
foreign refugees in England have come to
light in the form of despatch by Lord GRAN
VILE, prepared in reply to communications
from several of the absoutist governments
of Europe. He points out, in the first place,
that foreigners have an unrestricted right of
being bound to respect the laws which pro-
tect them, they are amenable to justice when
ever concerned in levyng war against the
government of State at peace with Britain.
he condemns any attempts on the part OF
refugees to excite foreign Instructions, but de-
cIares that the feeling Of the people of England
would not permit a departure from the practice
of hospitality TO all classes Of political fugi
tives-not to democrats and revOlutionlsts only i,
but to princes, prime ministers, and kings. 1t
is stated that this despatch has been received
favorably by the governments to whom it was
addressed.
1t is impossible to read the debates to which
the dismissal Of Lord PALMKRsroN has given
rise without remarking the apparent dsposi-
| ton on all sides to adhere more closely to the
| policy of intervention than England has
hitherto been disposed to do. Apart from the
considerations of etiquette as between the
crown and a minister, or minister and ano
ther which formed the alleged ground Of PAL
VERSIONS dismissal, there runs through the
| Premier's speech vein Of professed disappro-
val of the PALMERsroN policy of general inter-
meddlng, and of desire TO stand aloof as com
petely as possible in any future continental
troubles We are not disposed to attach much
importance TO this altered tone, for in truth in
tervention on England's part has nearly al
ways been uni-lateral; but it deserves a pass
| ing mention in view of the efforts of interven-
tIonists in our own country.
Two other noticeable things are revealed in
these debates. One is the active controlling
| influence claimed by the Queen in the manage
ment Of foreign afiars-an influence utterly at
variance with the idea that the English SOW
eregn is merely puppet, and TO our mind al
variance also with the constitutional freedom
which -the English people profess TO enjoy
| The other is, the unmistakable jealousy and
dislike entertained by aristocratic leaders OF
| both the old parties towards the press, which,
in their opinion, passes the proper boundary
when II discusses. as it has discussed, the con-
! duct Of LOUIS NAPOLEON and his abettors II
is quite plain that if Lord DERBY, Lord j.
! RUSSELL, and Lord Cry, had their way, a
censorship little less severe than that Of
France would be established in England.
and the press, instead of being free as
now, would be constrained to speak in
honeyed phrase Of despotic treachery and ex-
cess, OF to observe perfect silence. CARLYLE
or EMERSON, or some writer of their class, has
described the press of the present day as inf
nitely more potent than the pulpit; and the i'll.
concealed uneasiness Of the lordly Legislators
OF England would seem TO Indicate their con-
scousRess that the giant power of the pen
trenches at last upon the domain Of hereditary
craftsmanship.
In reference to the Queens newly assumed
pretension, the London Times prints in promi.
nent type very remarkable letter, shadowing
forth the position which that influential journal
is disposed to take in the premises 1t com.
Pares Britain to family, with the people as
head, the Queen as the wife, and the statesmen
as the servants, and portrays in terms Of
quiet irony the relative rights and duties Of
each. The husband, being the worker, rules