Графични страници
PDF файл
ePub
[ocr errors]

tical apostacy of the man who, when out of place, would press the country to call for, and the legislature to countenance, plans of reform which he, when in place, pronounces to be pregnant with ruin to the constitution. On this head, the author writes with great and just severity: but there are some points in which he does not appear to have a very correct idea either of the reform which he would have adopted in England, or of the principle of representation which has received the royal sanction in Corsica. In both cases it would seem as if full and free representation were the object : but a wide difference appears to occur between the means to be used in the attainment of the end. Some reformers call for an equal representation, and some for the right of universal fuffrage : these terms are not synonymous; for, though every man in England should have a vote for a representative in parliament, yet every man could not be said to be equally represented, as long as (for instance,) che little county of Rutland should return as many members as Yorkshire. Equality of representation has been established in Corsica, in as much as that the country is divided into pieves, or districts, as nearly as possible of equal extent and population, and each pieve sends two members to parliament; towns, also, containing 3000 inhabitants, have the same privilege: but it is by no means true that the principle of universal suffrage has been admitted in Corsica. In Sir Gilbert Elliot's dispatch of the 21st of June, to Mr. Dundas, we indeed find these words: “

every man, almost without exception, has voted :" but the words, almost without exception, had we no other evideoce, might be perhaps sufficient to thew inat the elections were not conducted on the principle of universal fuffrage.. Sir Gilbert, however, is not silent on this head, for he cells us that it was property alone that gave the right of voting; nay, more, that it was property in lands: at the same time, he informs us that this kind of property was so generally divided, or, to use his own words, “ the state of property being such, that aithough none but landbolders were electors, every man, almost without exception, has voted.” Hence it is clear that Mr. Pitt has noc given into the idea of universal suffrage, as it is evident that the qualification for a vote in Corsica, (we must except, we presume, the towns,) can be acquired only by a tenure of land: but whether it is as proprietor or occupier that the voter becomes qualified, we cannot decide. Our author is therefore far from being correct when he says (p. 45):

• Thus from the noble Text of his Majesty, and the faithful obedience of his Plenipo to have it executed in the general manner just quoted, we may almoit venture to conclude, Sir, that the Roya! Master, and the approved good servant, were zealous fricnds, in the

present

Y 4

present instance, at least, of Corfican-Representation, to UNIVERSAL SUFFRAGE.'

None, we fee, can be either electors or ele&ted, who do not possess property in land; to which must be superadded residence for a year in the place for which they are voters or candidates.

Whenever the business of reform is seriously taken up in England, we presume that it will not be thought sufficient to ascertain to whom the right of voting shall be extended, but that it will be deemed necessary to declare that the number of representatives, to be chosen for any particular district, shall be proportioned to its population; or, in other words, that fot so many hundred or thousand electors, there shall be so many members elected. Thus the present unaccountable disproportion will vanish; and, until this be done, though the right of universal fuffrage should obtain, we cannot be said to have an equal representation. Our author has set this matter in a very clear point of view :

• The injustice as well as absurdity of this disproportion of Dele-
gates to the proportion of Electors, cannot more glaringly be exhibited
or more forcibly exposed, even to the comprehension and conviction
of the most humble capacity, than by the following table :
Places.
Electors.

Members.
London

7,000
sends

4
Westminster

10,000 Middlesex

3,500 Surry

4,500 Southwark

2,000

2

[ocr errors]

2

2

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

The disproportion that strikes the eye in the above table would become infinitely greater, if every housekeeper in the above places pofseffed the right of voting.

The author seems to have overlooked one circumstance in the Corsican representation, which, had he duly attended to it, might perhaps have a little weakened his partiality to that

System.

system. It struck us very forcibly when we read the following article in the new Conftitution of Corsica:

“ That no person shall be elected a member of Parliament, unless he possesses at least 6,000 livres (about 3001.) per ann. in land in the Pieve which he is to represent, and pays taxes in proportion to this poffeffion, and unless born of a Corsican father, and tona fide an inhabitant, having kept house for five years in the said Pieve, and until he has arrived at the age of twenty-five.

Such an article as this, in a system of representation for England, would not alarm us, because the number of persons, not connected with the aristocracy, yet poffefling 3001. a-year, is very great; and consequently the electors could not be limited to a small circle for the choice of representatives :-Out in Corsica, 300l. a year is a very large revenue; the whole island is not more than 110 miles in length, and so in breadth; its population is considerably under 200,000 inhabitants; and it has little or no trade : so that those who pofiess 300l. a-year in lands must be very few in number, and persons of old or noble families. Hence it follows that, let the elector's be who they may, the elected can be taken only from the body of the aristocracy; and no doubt many individuals, if this system should continue, will, though elected biennially, possess in reality an hereditary seat in the Corsican parliament.

The author prides himself not a little on having started a new reflection, by observing that in England and Ireland the conftituents and representatives stand not on even ground with respect to prosecution and punishment for mutual misconduct: the inequality of their situations is thus expressed by him :

· The fact is, that the great measure of a Reform in the Representative Body of the nation is not attainable, however just and necessary, through the medium or force of any existing laws. It depends en. tirely, in the immediate instance, on the mere grace of the Legislature. Hence it is not unworthy of remark, that the People and the LeGISLATURE do not stand, in this essential business, on equally fair ground. This is manifest from the consideration, that the former are subject to indi&ment and punishment, at the prosecution of the Executive Power, should they attempt, by illegal modes, a Reform or recovery of their constitutional rights :—whereas the Legislature, or more pertinently speaking to our present point, the Representatives of the Nation, are not prosecutable, by any law, at the suit of the People, should they betray the trust reposed in them by their constituents, or act ever so unjustly in with holding from them the neces. fary Reformation they folicit.

i One of the great boasts of what is termed the most GLORIOUS CONSTITUTION in the world is--that it affords law for the beggar as well as the King:—but in the case, at present under consideration, 'tis palpably clear, that there are laws for punishing illegal proceedings of Conftituents towards their Representatives, but none" for 5

punishing punishing the misconduct, (however notoriously influenced by venal motives) of a Representative towards his conftituents.'

In our opinion, the author would not find this inequality so ftriking, perhaps he could not find it at all, if he had properly defined the terms People and Legislature. In their collective capacity, neither can be prosecuted nor punished; in their individual capacities, both may. If some individuals allemble to bring about a reform, or any other measure, by force or violence, they certainly might and would be indicted: but, were the whole people with one voice to call for and insist on having a parliamentary reform, who could indict them, where could grand juries be found to return bills against them, where petit juries to try them, where the pole comitatus to enable the theriffs to carry the verdicts into effect? Against the Legijiature, the iaw could not have provided any proceeding; becaule, exerciling the fovereignty of the state, it could not be liable to punishment. Against the House of Commons no action is given to the people; because the people, by the conftitution, are supposed to be there afsembled ; and it would be absurd to give a man an action against himself. Should an individual member offend against the law, he is as punishable as any of his conftituents : Thould he be convicted of bribery or corruption in getting into parliament, there are laws for inficting pretty severe penalties on him; and should he be proved to have fold his vote in the house, he is liable to imprisonment, and finally to expulfion. Such proceedings are perhaps not so frequent as some people think they might be: but instances of the kind have occurred, as appears from the Journals of the House of Commons.

In the pamphlet before us we see much to approve, and little to condemn: but we must confess that in one place, at least, we discover symptoms of something bordering on an approbation of the idea of pafling-by parliament, and calling on the people to take the business of reform into their own hands. We allude to the following paffage: 'No solecism, (fays our author, page 9,) can be more gross than to imagine that corruption will purify itself.' In this short fentence, our imagination, without being over-lively, or very ready to catch alarms, sees the possibility of disturbance, confufion, and civil war, if the idea which it conveys were entertained by a great body of men. When the people move, there js no power in the state to stop them. Nothing, it is true, but great provocation, and a conviction that redrefs could not otherwile be obtained, would ever make them rise : but, when once risen, nothing but their own moderation could make them put an end to their movement, and fit down in peace. Moderation from millions is what may rather be wilhed than expected; and, before it shouid begin to act, much mischief

might

might be done. On the other hand, we believe that parliament will not reform itself, until it shall appear to be the general sense of the people that it should. Let that sense be once fairly and clearly expressed by petitions or addresses, and all opposition to reform must die away within the walls of St. Stephen's chapel. The people never yet spoke in vain: but, if parliament hear the voice only of this or that society, is it to blame for not considering it as the voice of the people? Let the counties, the cities, the towns, explain themselves clearly on the subject ; and we will not hesitate to give it as our opinion that their wishes, whatever they may be, will prevail, without tumult, confufion, or strife; for surely no minister would ever be hardy enough to advise nis sovereign to resist the general sense of the nation; or, could such a minister ever arise, he certainly will never find a king either weak or mad enough to follow his advice.

Sh.

Art. XV. An Essay on the Picturesque, as compared with the Sub

lime and the Beautiful; and on the Use of studying Pictures, for the Purpose of improving real Landscape. By Uvedale Price, Esq.

8vo. pp. 288. 55. Boards. Robson. 1794. WE

E shall say the less of this essay, here, as the extracts,

which will be found in the two following articles, will speak our sentiments of it with better effect than any which our own assertions could singly produce. Its origin and history are given by the Author in bis Preface:

* This unfinished work and such, I fear, it is in every respect) I did not intend publishing till it was more complete, and till I had éndeavoured, at least, to render it more worthy the public inspection. I have, however, been induced to send it into the world earlier than I wished, from the general curiosity which my friend Mr. Knight's poem has awakened on the subject.

• It would have been more prudent in me not to have afforded the public such an opportunity of judging, how much I am indebted to the effusion of friendship and poetry, for the high compliment he has paid me ; were I now to say what I feel about my friend's poem, it might appear like a return of compliment; and whatever could in any way be so misconstrued, would be equally unworthy of us both.

• I cannot however, resist the satisfaction of mentioning one cir. cumstance, highly flattering to me, as it accounts for my not chusing to delay this publication. I had mentioned to Mr. Knight that I had written some papers on the present style of improvement, but that I despaired of ever getting them ready for the press; though I was very anxious that the absurdities of that style should be exposed. Upon this he conceived the idea of a poem on the same subject; and having all his materials arranged in his mind, from that activity and perseverance which so strong!y marked his character, he never delayed or abandoned the execution till the whole was completed. When it

was

« ПредишнаНапред »