The Press.
London, England, 1858-03-06 00:00:00

LONDON, SATURDAY, MARCH 0, 1858.

THE prospects of the new Ministry may be
reviewed either from a theoretical or a prac-
tical point of view. Under the latter head
will come such considerations as we last week
presented to our readers—the position of
parties in the House of Commons, and the
probability which it affords of a successful
Conservative Administration. Under the
former head will fall the general tono and
temper of the public mind, which might
render a Conservative Government acceptable
to the nation at large.
If we recur to our observations of last
last week it is only because they have been
misrepresented in some quarters and carefully

we gave utterance to no deep enigma. It is
perfectly plain that where out of various can-
didates for office one must unavoidably be
chosen, a defect which is common to all ceases
to be an objection to any. In ordinary cases it
is the points wherein competitors differ, not
those wherein they agree, which determines
our selection. To eliminate the latter is our
first step. And in deciding, therefore, between
rival parties of politicians, we must at once
discard all arguments founded on a want
which none of them are able to supply. The
absence of a fixed majority is, therefore, no
impediment to a Government at the present
day, because if we permit it to be one, we must
go without Government altogether. None can
regret more than we do that our Parliamentary
system has sunk into such a condition. But
sunk it has. And we see no prospect of im-
provement as long as "independent members"
usurp the jurisdiction of political leaders.
There are others, again, who will have it
that our facts are incorrect, and that Lord
PALNEss.roN has a fixed majority. He has
been inexplicably deposed from office, but still
the majority is his. Not a statesman of
eminence defended him, but he was still the
favourite of the House. " Whom the gods
" love die young," says the proverb ; and this,
we suppose, is the reason why the Palmers-
tonian Cabinet, more than once dangerously
sick, has expired in its third session. Se-
riously, such arguments are the last resource
of the desperate. In the face of the recent
division they verge on the sublime. But once
for all, let us examine how the case stands by
the vulgar test of figures. The minority who
voted for Lord PALMERSTON on the 19th of
February were 215 in number ; of these 35
were Conservatives. To the remaining 180
we may add about a dozen Palmerstonians
accidentally absent from the debate. Thus
192 will be the strength of the phalanx on
which the Noble Lord could rely. The
majority on the same occasion were 234 ; of
these 150 were regular Conservatives. But the
united strength of the Conservative party in

the present House of Commons is just about
230. There are, therefore, 74 to be accounted
for. Of these 35, as we see, formed part of the
Palmerstonian minority; and the remaining
39, we believe we may safely assert, are sup-
porters of the present Administration, who
will, therefore, muster 195 in all against the
192 of their opponents. Thus even in the
present House of Commons the party of Lord
PALMERSTON is, at the outside, not more than
numerically equal to the Conservatives, while
in its composition it is obviously far weaker;
for a party which is founded on purely per-
sonal considerations has small chance of co
hesion when the presiding spirit is disgraced.
If we add to these arguments the probability
of the Palmerstonian Conservatives returning
to their allegiance, the possibility of other rents
in the Conservative Party being healed, and
the seats they would be certain to gain by
a dissolution of Parliament, we cannot be
deemed sanguine in believing that from the
practical point of view Lord DERBY'S position
is secure.

The theoretical argument against the pre-
sent Administration amounts to this—that the
general feeling of this country being favoura-
bil-te progressive reforms. it is impossible