The Express.
London, England, 1865-06-27 00:00:00

OPERA sad RACE GLASSES, by NEGRETTI 1
mid UMBRA. naiad 41e„ in leather ease, with reek „
metal lenses, or to alwalsiam pilaw awl upwards. To be
yd their 'oar astalidusuN...
witeslist6ozgaadas ; ee,
; 111, LegeoVerreet ; lbh.

JOHN BROODER'S PARIS FIRST CLASS
sad LONDON PRIM ILZDAL&—lianufscs==
risits-stisst. ConsLeardes, Died" W.C. This
is closed at 1. and cm Ilidardsgs si 1 deka.

ithEEMBILS I you will we your friends at
zvin Wier Ow Opera, We awn sap there.

a? he entrefni. lb"
G !MAINE!.
Tzi WEN.% NY W4rd MOTHS& Nan.
Heel, Gerdes: Naedeseee Geowdes sod WMIGL2M4IIIIIII..
SAN M. Soars. leedeMess, sad Oempers; Needaeme
Snow Mead/rocas—AM NO GONG NO 811PTER.

11111.01,0"11:

Turn SZAZT:NTILITIGS IIDDIA4TIIIOB.
—AMU! NA !WM Mews. D. j.
3ra&D.
H. irsadishoN, D. name. KUrrai,
9aseicaall and Yids K. Oliver.—tad Aral.= MOLINA.

SISTANNIA.
Tlfl trams, MS MIAMI DHINCTIVI. Wawa
wide mad Dwwwwwd ; Kim IL Mmadlles.-THA MAGIC W ISHING
CA.P. Moms. JOM,ft Leib ; et. Ohm wad
Mn. -dadbireSELlA 10261.1.-Cawww• W

WATEM DON-A=ol
Tim DAY Mania& 40 AT
. IlLONks.....Aftsraoce. 510..
icorossow itorian. nu---Artemoon. 511.

A DOUBLE NUMBER

01 TER

"EXPRESS"
WILL BE PUBLISHED TOMORROW.

Advertisements roost be at tbo aloe by 2 o'clock.

LONDON, TUESDAY, JUNE 27.

Tai Roman Catholic Oath Bill was me thoroughly
discussed in the Commons, that it is no wonder
the Lords last night found nothing new to say
on the subject. It was enough that they should
clearly apprehend its principle, and this they evi-
dently did. In the first sentence of the speech in
which he moved the rejection of the Bill the Earl of
DERBY observed that it was the principle of perfect
political equality, irrespective of religious distino-
tions, which was before the House: and he was
right. It was on this ground that a Liberal ma-
jority of the House of Commons passed it, and on
this ground the Conservative leader of the
Lords called upon his fellow-peers to reject it.
And yet there are those who affirm that party dis-
tinctions are out of date, that there is no difference
between Liberal and Conservative, and nothing
worth striving for at the impending elections.
The present oath makes an invidious distinction
between the rights and liberties of members of the
same Legislature. There are two chases of mem-
bers of the House of Commons, one very muchlarger
than the other ; one with liberty to speak and vote
freely according to the public convictions of its
members, and to represent the wishes of their
constituents, and the other forbidden to do so.
If danger were to be apprehended to any institu-
tion from free deliberation and voting, it might be
supposed that it would come from the larger class,
and that its privileges would be selected for limita-
tion and restriction. But it is not so. The powerful
many are left free to do what they please—to vote for
the abolition of church-rates, for example--while the
few, who can do nothing alone, are muzzled and
fettered. Thus the representative system of the Em-
pire is mutilated, andrepresentatives are met at the
threshold of the House of Commons with an oath
binding them not to represent those who elected them.
Imagine such a state of things being reported of the
Austrikit Reichastb 'how we should all pity the
people who submitted to such degradation; and yet it
is to go out tothe constitutional countries of Europe,
to the Colonies, and to America, that we are afraid
to permit even that limited portion of the'oommu-
nity to which we give votes to be freely represented
in Parliament, and when the House of Com-
mons, ashamed of such • slur upon our freedom,
sends up a bill to put an end to the anomaly, the
Lords reject it.
Lord DERBY is a man of too much sense
to be under any delusion as to the character
of the part which he condescended to play
in the House of Lords last night. He could
not pretend that the prohibition he defended was
just, or in harmony with the spirit of • free con-
stitution. He opposed the Bill as one likely to
facilitate the downfall of a particular in-
stitution. His argument was that if every
Member of Parliament were allowed to speak
his mind and vote accordingly, the Irish
Church would be in danger, and therefore

they should not be permitted to do so. The Irish
Establishment may be a better institution than is
generally supposed ; it is not, however, to be com-
pared to the Church of England. But would the
people of this realm allow the liberty of Parlia-
ment to be sscrifioed for tbesake of even the English
Establishment? Surely, Lord DERBY has found a
notable way of defending the Irish Establishment
when he admits that it is inconsistent with a free
Parliament.
The public owe much to Lord DERBY for the
frankness with which he has expressed his opinion.
He took pains last night to show that the existing
oath was a real and effective restraint upon the
expression of the conscientious opinion of mem-
bers of Parliament. In that lies its vir-
tue and efficacy ; it is for that Lord DERBY
loves it. Somebody had said, " Unmuzzle the
" senators." And Lord DERBY replies :—" If you
" said, Take the muzzle off this poor creature, he
" is perfectly harmless, and moreover the muzzle
" is half rotten, it is not any great protection after
" all,' I could understand that. But if you come
" and say, This is the most vicious animal going,
" and there is nothing to prevent him pulling you
" to pieces, but this muzzleon his nose, pray take
"it off ;my answer is, Thank you, I would rather
" keep the muzzle on.' (Laughter.)" This is
very striking ; in future we shall think of Lord
DERBY and his party not by the clumsy and inex-
pressive name of Conservatives, but as
" !dazzlers." He has at length provided his
party with a watchword, and followers may rally
at the poll to the cry of " Lord DERBY and
" Muzzles."

Tuzaz is a species of deference which members
of Parliament imagine they owe to their consti-
tuents, the value of which is subject to much doubt.
We refer to the obligation they suppose them-
selves under to announce at the earliest moment
an intention which they may have formed not to
offer themselves for re-eleotion. Here is the case
of Finsbury, from the representation of which Sir
MORTON Prro retires to seek the favour of the
electors of Bristol. It is not lea than a year, we
believe, since the honourable baronet's purpose was
made known, and the contest for his seat may be
said to have been going on ever since. For twelve
months candidates have been disfiguring the walls
with placards, and insinuating themselves into
every company, literary, philanthropic, or religious,
where they might see and be seen, besides
" stumping" the borough in a more regular manner.
For twelve months they have had the annoyance
of a contest without its exhilarating excitement.
This is very tiresome for the electors, and, we may
suppose, equally so for the candidates, for there was

t I
I I
I
111