The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1869-01-28

ulCteu 10 Lne use Ol uaTSu WOrubs
Elections I'm England and the United
States.
THE recent elections in England have caused
much disappointment among those who ex-
pected immediate and widespread results
from the extension of the franchise. They
have not sufficiently borne in mind the force
of custom and loDg-established usage which,
is nowhere so powerful as with the masses
of the English nation; and they are disap-
pointed that men who have been hindered for
centuries from thinking or acting for them
selves should not, in the first moment Of en-
franchisement, seek and secure the wisest and
most immediate method ofOreating themselves
into one of the powers of the realm.
1t has been natural to institute compari-
son between the representative systems Of
Great Britain and the United States, with
their superficial resemblance and great radi-
, cal difference.
Goldwn Smith most emphatically asserts
that the English elections are controlled by
wealth. that every thing else is powerle5s
against it; and that cit is the pound, and not
the dollar, that is really almighty"
In that zest jor sef-condemnation which
seems to be unisally enjoyed, Americans
are accustomed TO confess this nation to be
the devOtee of money, and to reserve their
choicest denuncations for the venality and
corruption of politics; but this venality,
alike deciied by England and the United
States, is exhibited very differently.
In general terms, it might be said that in
America the voters not bought, but tha,
the only people purchased are their repre-
sentatives; while in England the vote is
matter of open bargain and ths member after
buying his constituents acts as if he owned
them as his personal property. There is great
wrong in each case, but the advantage lies
with us, in so far that each individual voter is
taught to feel himself responsible for his
action at the polls. He is we'll aware of his
influence, and if his representative proves
false to the trust reposed in him, the voter is
condemned in his own heart for the folly or
feebleness which permitted the crime. Before
the ultimate tribunal of his own conscience
every voter in America must make answer
whether he has exerted himself to the utmost
in the right direction, before he can wash his
own hands free of the offenss of participating
in or permitting the election of weak or
vensi legislator
But perhaps the most striking difference be-
tween the representation in the two countries
is found in the fact that the Congressman is
the representative of party, while the mem
Der of Parliament is primarily the representa-
tive of an 'interest." Maine or Louisiana
might elect q Republican or Democrat, but his
partisanship would be of paramount import
ance, and it would be only a secondary con-
sideration, and entirely dependent upon his
personal character, whether he would effect
lively devote himself to the interests of ship
yards or sugar vats while, on the other hand,
in the British Parliament the landed interest
presents a solid platoon of representatives,
who, expecting no personal emolument from
their individual action, intend to reap their
advantages from defending the interests and
promoting the welfare of their class. Manu-
factures and commerce are also largely repre-
sented by members to whom their craft is of
the first concern, and all other measures Of
secondary importance.
England has gained as q nation great ad-
vantages from this power of combination
among her business interests, which has per-
mitted the whole weight of the Government
to be thrown, as emergencies required, in
favor of the shipping, manufacturing, or
agricultural interest. The nation has been
built up at the expense of the individual, and
she may boast of the success of her manufac-
lures, but she must confess that her laborers
are psupers; while we, on the other hand, can
point proudly to our workingman, although
his trade often suffers ruinous fluctuations
! from the want of stability pivan by visa