18 NOVEMBER 1837, Page 8

TRIAL OF ELECTION PETITIONS.

SUPPOSE that the Peers would repeal the Grenville Act, and pass any bill of the Commons to establish a fair tribunal for the deci- sion of controverted elections, how should the Liberals deal with the existing system of fraud and injustice? The impossibility of forming a Committee of unbiassed Members, is a fatal objection to any plan which proceeds on the assumption that the House of Commons affords the materials for an impartial tribunal. An assessor might explain the law, but he could not control votes. The decision would still be guided by political considerations and party feeling. But even if an impartial court could be formed, the mischief would be but remedied in a degree. The most in dustrious, acute, and honourable men, would find themselves em- barrassed and baffled by the cases which would be brought before them; and justice would still be tardy and dear. The cases which arise under the Reform Act are almost infinite. Questions of qualification alone may be multiplied so as to occupy the time of the Court for half a session. We are not aware that any unnecessary delay took place in revising the list of votes given at the famous Dublin election ; and yet the investigation lasted for months, and was fearfully expensive. It might answer the put* pose of certain parties to concoct a similar case each session, us order to retain seats unfairly got. A dozen courts would not suffice for the petition business of a first session; while the dif• &Idly, annoyance, and expense of the process might be as' greet

ic wider, tha present system :. a aionecimatieua decision .would Mutually be obtained, but it what an. unreasonable cost !

Plainly, then, it is beginning at. the wrong end to establish a pew tribunal for the trial of election petitions. The first care of the Legislature should be to lessen the number and simplify the astuse,of questions to be decided. With this view, the suffrage should he:simplified, and the vote protected.

" If the rate-book were made the register, and no questions except those relating to identity put to the voter at the time or polling, there would be an end to the difficulty arising from the compli- cated nature of the present qualification. There would be no con- flicting decisions as to trusteeships ; no contradictory evidence of ;slue; no frivolous objections. If in addition to an extended and simplified franchise, impunity were secured to the elector by the protected vote, there would be an end to intimidation, and bribery could seldom be practised. So few points of dispute would then remain, that the ordinary tribunals in Westminster, and at the Assizes in the country, might easily dispose of them. It would not be difficult to affix penalties for violation of the law, to be recovered by the Town-Clerk or the Clerk of the Peace. In certain cases the validity of the election would be involved. Well—would not Lord DENMAN or Lord AUINGIIR, guided by an act of Parliament, be as trustworthy and as well qualified to de- cide such questions as those now submitted to them, and which are frequently of quite as much practical importance as whether a Whig or a Tory shall sit in the House of Commons?

Nodoubt, with the simple qualification proposed, unqualified per- sons might occasionally vote; but let 10,000 such exercise the privilege, what mighty mischief would ensue ? What weight can the worst conceivable consequence of such irregularity have in comparison with the advantage of purging the electoral system, and securing to the country real representation in Parliament?

It is to be hoped that the Hefei mess will not waste their strength in abortive attempts to effect diminutive reforms. It was assumed at the beginning of these suggestions, that the Peers would consent to the repeal of the Grenville Act: but who ex- pects such a concession ? With a really independent House of Commons—an eflicieut instrument of legislation—the Peers might be managed ; but until a second Reform Bill has been extorted from the aristocracy, it is vain to expect that the House of Peers will relinquish any means of undue influence.