But we must not lose sight of the fact, that this majority is greatly increased by the overwhelming influence, and in many places the absolute control, which is exercised by the large landed proprietors in most of the counties, and in several of the open boroughs. The whole of these members have interests in opposition to those of the people, and when to these glaring defects in the representative system, are added the bribery and corruption practised, in consequence of the mode in which the votes are taken-the prolonged continuance of elections, with all their riot and debauchery—the difficulties of voting in counties, and the nuisance of non-resident voters—we may well exclaim, how vast a space is there for reformation We may add, how vast are the obstacles which a reforming administration has to overcome. Among the great borough proprietors or patrons, we find the following: DIVISION ON THE REFORM BILL. THERE were three or four new members introduced into the house, during the time these sheets were passing through the press, whose names could not be inserted in their alphabetical order. Such of them as took their seats previous to the division on the reform bill, will be found in the following list, and as a member's vote upon this great question is now properly considered to be the test of his character, nothing further need here be said of them. An analysis of the names of the members who divided upon the important occasion just referred to, will exhibit another argument, and perhaps a more cogent one than could in any other way be advanced, for an immediate and radical reform of the house of commons. The total number of members, deducting the vacancies for Evesham, Colchester, Durham, Nairn, Londonderry, and Clare*, was 651. Of these, there were in the division, 603, and 15 paired off, leaving but 30 members absent, from sickness, moral indisposition, and other causes- a larger house than was ever before known to go to a division. On the catholic question, the numbers on the division amounted to 462; and on the civil list, to 441. But let us look, for a moment, at the elements of which the minority and the majority upon this question are composed, and endeavour to estimate their relative value. Those boroughs for which the members are nominated by individuals, have a large majority against the bill: of this class we find 80 votes for ministers, and 140 against them. The open boroughs, on the other hand, display a greater relative majority for the bill, than the preceding class does against it; there being of these open borough votes, 86 for the bill, and 35 against it. Of county members, there is a majority of 95, against 60, in favour of the proposed measure. In the Scotch representation, which is notoriously and flagrantly corruptthere being scarcely one member returned by the voice of the people-the preponderance of members against the bill is 15; there being 11, for it, and 26 against it. It is hence easy enough to perceive in what quarter the evil is most dense and desperate. Some, indeed, object, that the plan of reform submitted by ministers is not sufficiently extensive for the exigence of the people; but by a reference to the preponderance of boroughmongering influence, as above stated, every candid person must acknowledge that the present Some of these vacancies were subsequently filled up,thus:-Colchester-Mr. Mayhew, a reformer; Durham-Mr. Chaytor, a reformer; Nairn-the old member, good for nothing; Londonderry-sir R. Fergusson, a reformer; Clare-Maurice O' Connell, son of the member for Waterford, and a reformer. remedy would remove a vast portion of the evil under which the representative system is suffering. How obvious is the necessity of reformation rendered by the result of this division! While the whole country is animated by but one unanimous feeling on the subject, the assembly which pretends to represent the national sentiments and wishes, is somewhat about equally divided as to the propriety of the intended change! And even the majority of one, which the ministers had in the division, resulted more from interested design than from honest principle. There are forty-two members who voted in favour of the second reading of the bill, who have constantly opposed every previous motion for a reform in the British representation. The object of these trust-worthy and illuminated sages is very distinct and glaring-They had sufficient prescience to know that parliament must be dissolved, whilst by giving their specious suffrages in support of the bill, they endeavoured to assume the character of liberality and justice, in the estimation of their constituents, before whom they would have to appear. So that by playing the "wolf in sheep's clothing" they imagined to be again returned, and thence to acquire the power either to frustrate, or at least delay, the measure, which the whole country is so eager to see completed. Ind pendent of the forty-two members above alluded to, there are others who, though they voted for the second reading, avowed their intention to oppose the bill in the committee, unless it should be so modified in its provisions as to be essentially changed; that is, be rendered unworthy of acceptance. Those members who voted for the measure are marked by a; those against it, by n; those who paired off in favour of it, by *p; those who paired off against it, by tp; and those who were absent, by - The forty-two members marked with a, voted under suspicious circumstances, having uniformly opposed all previous motions for a reform in the House of Commons. It is certain, in fact, that several of them only reserved their opposition, until the bill went into the committee, where they conceived their chances of success against its details, would be more efficient. The asterisk (*) preceding the name, distinguishes the members for the boroughs to be partially disfranchised; the double asterisk, (**) those to be wholly disfranchised. |