Relative Wealth of Borough and County Constituents. 377 that not less than 27,415-or about seventy-five per cent.-vote as freeholders. Nor even does the remaining fourth by any means consist only of Occupying Tenants. Besides this class, there are 1726 copyholders, 1270 leaseholders, (the former wholly, the latter partially, ten-pounders,) and nearly a thousand more who vote under anomalous qualifications. The Occupying Tenants form but 5942--or about sixteen per cent.—of the electors of this constituency. This, too, is but a just example, though an example on a large scale. When, moreover, we find such a district split into 27,000 distinct freeholders, it may be presumed that the average of education and social rank among the voters under those titles is below, rather than above, that average among the borough constituencies. Viewing, therefore, the disproportion between the borough and county representation as one which at all events is not to be aggravated by any distinction in the respective qualifications, let us inquire for a moment, in what manner, if the legislature is to address itself to this question, the present disproportion is to be rectified? Now it appears that, in Yorkshire and Lancashire alone, there are nineteen or twenty non-enfranchised towns, with an aggregate population of some 750,000. The Reform Act can hardly be said to have recognised any general principle of enfranchisement; but, in practice at least, it not only enfranchised Frome, with a population (according to the last census) of only 10,000, but it enfranchised Kendal, a quasi-manufacturing town, with a population even now of only 11,000. Now it cannot certainly be argued that, because the Act of 1832 did in fact confer the franchise upon such towns, a future reform should be required to recognise a general principle in those examples. But it certainly does appear to us that, if the Conservative party (as Mr. Disraeli has already intimated) intend to attempt the recovery of a portion of their lost influence by a lessening of the present disproportionate representation of the counties, they will be entirely unable logically to encounter the appeal of the ultra-Reformers, for an enfranchisement of such towns as we have adverted to, and whose populations it is that really swell the electoral divisions of the northern counties to their present immense numbers. This, then, is a result directly opposed to what the Conservatives really desire to attain. And although the Radicals and the Conservatives complain in common of the unequal representation of the county constituencies, there is here at least very little reason to apprehend their combination, when the question assumes a practical shape; inasmuch as the one party would redress the inequality by an enfranchisement of the large towns, while the other party would probably do so by multiplying the electoral divisions of counties. And we think that the contest which will probably ensue between the two extreme parties, on this particular point, will go far to neutralize the success of either. But without reference to this larger question, we certainly think that these nineteen or twenty towns have their claim to more direct representation than they now possess. A writer advocating such views no doubt exposes himself to the pleasant sarcasm lately put forth in a leading Review, that his 'opinions run in the old ruts.' This advocacy, however, does not involve our suggesting any increase in the aggregate town representation even of the North of England. It can hardly, indeed, have escaped any man who saw Mr. Cobden sitting during ten years as member for the West Riding -and who knows how strongly Conservative opinions are implanted in the agricultural districts of that Riding-that the rural interest has there been swamped by the town interest.* Nor can there be any doubt that a reduction of the county franchise will bring more additional townsmen than additional farmers into this electorate; and consequently increase the present disproportion. If, therefore, means can be devised for the exclusion of the large towns from the county franchise, in such instances as this, by their independent enfranchisement, without increasing, or appreciably increasing, either the town representation in the aggregate, or even the manufacturing representation in particular, surely a great demand would be satisfied, a general dissatisfaction would be appeased, and an additional guarantee for the finality of the anticipated measure be attained. In fact, the present electorate of the West Riding is as complete an illustration of what has been termed the tyranny of the majority' as can well be imagined.† It is an injustice only to be redressed in one of two methods, either the exclusion of the large non-enfranchised towns, or the introduction of a representation for the minority. There is no doubt that if the question of representing minorities were to be tested experimentally in the * When we remember that Mr. Cobden, in withdrawing from the West Riding, was defeated also for a manufacturing borough at the last election, and was succeeded in the former representation by a stanch and resolute advocate of triennial parliaments and the ballot (viz., Lord Goderich), his being no longer the representative of the West Riding can hardly be ascribed to his democratic opinions. †The writer of this article has, from circumstances, a considerable knowledge of the landed interest of the West Riding, and his impression is that that class, which are very numerous, though pleased in the abstract in being represented by a young nobleman of much energy and fair promise, are horrified, almost without exception, at their representative being an advocate of the ballot and of triennial parliaments. We say nothing of the justice or injustice of their opinions. We merely say that those opinions are swamped. Undue Fusion of Town and Country Voters. 379 new Reform Bill, no more favourable instance for its experimental adoption could be found than in this Riding, by the addition of a third seat-the voters, as at present, polling for two only. But if this latter expedient be dismissed as impracticable, on the ground of avoiding experimental legislation, partial in its extent, in a measure designed to be as final as any constitutional scheme in the present active developing of society can be-the former alternative still calls for consideration. We have said that the total population of these nineteen or twenty towns is about three quarters of a million, or one twenty-seventh of the total population of Great Britain. From this computation, it is true, a certain deduction must be made for the fact that the population-return refers to the registration district, and therefore includes the country immediately contiguous to the town. But this consideration, although it would involve a certain reduction in regard to the direct question of town enfranchisement, does not probably affect the extent of the town influence upon the present county constituency, inasmuch as the dwellers in immediate proximity to a large town are usually drawn into sympathy of opinion from the community of their active relations in life, even where such adjoining districts are not generally peopled by the townsmen themselves. Of these towns (thus computed), and according to the return of 1817,* as many as four were over 50,000, seven over 30,000, and eight or nine ranging between 30,000 and 13,000. Of these, the most populous is Burnley, with a population then of 63,000; and the smallest is Settle, with 13,000. Perhaps the increase of population in the last ten years may be allowed to cancel the deduction which should otherwise be made for the inclusion of quasi-rural districts into the computation. Now it will hardly be denied that some more direct enfranchisement than is now enjoyed by these towns would be a justice to themselves, and (if a representation of minorities shall not be introduced) also a relief to the counties. Where, too, a town population numbers 50,000, there may be a just presumption entertained that it possesses some distinctive interests to be represented, at all events, less indirectly than at present; much as there is a just presumption, on the other hand, that such a wide district as the West Riding possesses agricultural interests too extensive to be swamped by a town population. It may be said, no doubt, again, that if the towns can thus carry the county representation, they are already represented. But this marked preponderance probably applies only to the West Riding; even there, it is quite alien to the representation that is fit for towns * We have no later return at hand. virtually boroughs; it involves an enormous injustice to the county, as distinguished from the towns; and, finally, that injustice is likely to be increased by a lessening of the county franchise. A writer entering into detail upon this question may, no doubt, be accused of theorising; we shall, accordingly, refrain from entering into such detail, as to an application of the remedy we have mentioned. It will have been presumed, however, that the method which we have had in view for a lessening of this evil, without appreciably adding to the manufacturing representation, is that of adjusting and amalgamating cognate interests, rather than by wholly disfranchising any existing boroughs. Now while such towns as Manchester, Liverpool, Glasgow, or Birmingham, are represented by only two members-and we believe there is no general dissatisfaction with that arrangement -it is at least not essential to the balance of justice between them and the second, and even third, class manufacturing towns, that they should be represented by the same number. It would undeniably be more just, and on all grounds more politic, that where one manufacturing town, with a population of 30,000 or 40,000, sends two members to Parliament, and another manufacturing town, with a population of 60,000, sends no member at all, that the smaller town should be content with 'one member, and the larger should also have one. By these means alone much of the present injustice would be redressed; and be it observed, no possible difference would be produced in the aggregate representation of classes. There would remain the same number of members for manufacturing towns in the House of Commons as before. But there would not remain the complaint of injustice, founded on undeniable truth, which, unless it be now redressed, will gain developed expression in a demand for a fresh Reform Bill in 1860. If this expedient be in itself insufficient, there is also the equally just, and, for some indirect reasons, even the more politic one of amalgamation. The Edinburgh Review has lately put into a striking light the disposition of the large towns to elect their own traders, already too old for that ductility which is necessary to a successful initiation into parliamentary life, and unequal, if not also indisposed, to the higher ambition of the House of Commons. These representatives are chosen because they are known, personally or by reputation, to the electors, and because they have lived perhaps for twenty years in the borough, and are au fait of its peculiar interests. Now if several of these boroughs, not, of course, of the first class, were amalgamatedif large towns, now not enfranchised, were coupled with en Re-adjustment of Borough Representation. 381 franchised towns-so as, at any rate, to include two or three distinct towns in one constituency, it is not improbable that the present tendency to a choice of local representatives would be lessened. It would be quite necessary, of course, that the arrangement should not leave two towns to return two members collectively; otherwise, the worthy of each town would be supported by the other, under a reciprocal compact; and the result would be as before. But if three towns were jointly to return two members, or if two were jointly to return one, the action of any such compact would at all events be very indirect. It might be that occasionally some understanding as to alternate nominations would be arrived at. It would, however, in all probability, be quite exceptional: in any case the candidate coming from a distance would have a far better chance against a local celebrity where there are three towns to be considered, than where there is but one. The political candidate, who has done anything in public life, will be known something of in each of these towns. The municipal candidate, who may be omnipotent in one of them, may not have been heard of in the others. It is scarcely necessary to draw out in words the efficient application of this principle both to a relief of the northern counties from the predominance of the towns, and to a dissipation of the reciprocal injustice sustained in many instances by those towns themselves. The practical operation of the measure, in this respect, would of course be, for example, that where two distinct boroughs, with populations perhaps of 30,000 each, returned each one member, they should be united together with a third and non-enfranchised town with nearly the same population. The united borough would return two members-the two members jointly representing three towns, and 90,000 inhabitants. When, in several instances, we have numbers, larger by fourfold than this aggregate, represented by only two members, it is clear, at least, that it can meet with no numerical objection. Those who dread the increase of borough influence will perhaps acquiesce in a scheme which will probably increase, in effect, the agricultural representation, inasmuch as it will leave the agricultural interest to express its will more successfully at a poll, from which the large towns shall be excluded; while it will satisfy a plausible, as well as a just demand, without increasing the representation of the borough-party in the House of Commons. We have not space to enter, in this essay, upon a question involving so much of detail and technicality as a revision of the laws which at present regulate the expenses incurred in elections and petitions. It is, however, well worth consideration whether, |