The Press.
London, England, 1858-04-10 00:00:00

Nor are his supporters more earnest in the
matter than himself. While THE PRESS and
the liforning Herald have repeatedly argued in
favour of a Bill, the Times has declared, more
than once, that " nobody wants it."
It is not the question of "Reform," then,
that unites or distinguishes the Liberal
party. By what, then, is the party known,
and what are its objects ? We ask the ques-
tion, and it is one which demands an answer ;
but unquestionably that answer will not easily
be obtained.
The India Bill,—is it here that we discover
the difference between a Liberal and a Con-
servative Government? Far from it. What-
ever be the faults or the merits of either of the
two Bills, assuredly it cannot be said that
Lord PALMERSTON'S Bill was a more liberal
measure than Lord DERBY'S.
Where shall we seek, then, for " Liberal
objects "or " Liberal views "? What are the
opposing plans or principles by which Liberals
and Conservatives may be divided and diseri-
minated? If the " demoralizing union under
false colours " could be again formed, for what
purpose, beyond the mere possession of office,
would the various scattered members be
brought together, and to what end would their
efforts be directed? We search the Liberal
journals, daily, weekly, and monthly, in vain,
for an answer to this question.
Yet, are we to suppose, then, that no
ground of quarrel, that no battle-field, re-
mains? We will not so disguise our convic-
tions. India Bills or Reform Bills need not
separate Conservative from Liberal, for their
differences of opinion would be confined to
mere points of detail. But there is ONE
QUESTION, a large and vitally- important ques-
tion, which is more than " looming in the
distance." Statesmen do not like to talk of it,
or to think of it ; for it is a hard and thorny
question. But, whether they shrink from it or
not, the controversy draws nearer and nearer,
and it will hardly be possible for the most
cautious politicians to avert an open struggle
for many years longer.
That question is, THE CONTINUANCE OF THE
UNION OF CHURCH AND STATE.
It is this which lies at the bottom of most
of the practical propositions upon which
politicians are now divided. The real issue,
concealed under cover of the Bill for abolish.
ing Church-rates, is, whether the Church and
State shall continue united ? The actual
matter contested ;.n the Oaths Bill is, whether
England shall remain, like other old countries,
professedly a Christian State, or shall conform
to the American model, and dismiss all natioual
profession of a faith. This—this chiefly and
almost solely—is the remaining battle-field
between Conservative and Liberal. The
Saturday Review boldly claims the verdict as
already given, and asserts that " the theory of
a Christian State has been long since aban-
doned." But we beg leave to say that neither
of the above measures has yet been adopted
by Parliament ; nor do we see any prospect of
their being shortly so adopted. The dissolu-
tion of the Union of Church and State has
not yet been resolved upon, nor will it be so
for some years to come. There will be many a
long and eagerly-fought debate in both Houses,
before England leaves the ancient system of
adherence to a Christian profession, and adopts
the modern American one of knowing no pre-
ference for any creed. Meanwhile, however,
this is, we repeat, THE QUESIION—the only
great question which remains unsettled, and
in the settlement of which Conservatives and
Liberals may be hostilely arrayed. India
Bills, as we have said, involve no principle ;
one may be better or worse than another in
points of detail. Reform is no more, we trust,
to be made a ground of quarrel. On all sides
the expediency of some amendment of the Act
of 1832 is admitted. "No statesman now,"
said Lord STANLEY at Lynn, " in whatever part
"of the House he may sit, considers the
" Reform Bill of 1832 a final measure. No
" one denies that some modification of that
" Bill is reqnired." As to the Ballot, the
Liberals themselves are not united upon it
Lord PALMERSTON, Lord JOHN RUSSELL, and
Sir GEORGE C. LEWIS are its chief opponents.
CHURCH RATES, and OATHS BILLS, and other
questions of a kindred kind, will show them-
selves, more and more, the real ground of