The Express.
London, England, 1858-06-10 00:00:00

keet-samittaaky
l'arlisatte lie
r. thCsa.t tee.
like be

have far fire-...-
too large for electoral purpoimis yet
never found time serionslg to Ihisth about
Its attention is rather more thu las

ity years

Axed upon the necessity of dealing with this parti-
enlar evil, when the natural growth of enfranchise-
ment presents, am it will inevitably do, other instances
as well as these. But all this only serves to better
oar chance of a Redistribution Bill next year; it is

not,and itcannot, be taken for any excuse whatsoever
for not passing a moderate and limited Franchise
Amendment Bill this year.
What line, then, will Ministers take ? Will they
upon this as upon the Oaths Bill affect to ooasider
the subject as one not involving their administrative
existence, but one upon which every man in office
may be permitted to do what is right in hie own
eyes ? Last session Lord PALMEESTott, exulting in
the acquisition of a Parliamentary majority, which it
was supposed would render him ministerially
irresponsible and invincible, stoutly refused to give
any toleration to the proposal for 101. enfranchise-
ment in counties. From the division which took
place on that occasion, two or three of his
subordinates ran away, and the rest voted dutifully
as he commanded them. Lord STANLEY, we pet-
wive, adopted the expedient of absence on the
recent division in which his colleagues in a body
voted against the Ballot ; but the repetition
of this maureavre too often will not do ; and
those who, like ourselves, have hitherto taken •
decided and disinterested part in giving the present
Administration a fair trial, have a right to call
upon them, as we now do, plainly to declare what
they are, and what they mean to be.

Is the Diviaion of Tuesday night there voted for
the Ballot : All the Members for the Cities of Lon-
don and Westminster sad the Metropolitan Bo-
roughs, except two who voted against it, and two
who were absent ; the Members for Birmingham,
Manchester, Salford, Sheffield, Southampton, Edin-
burgh, Glasgow, Paisley, and Dundee. There is
scarcely one of these gentlemen who is not a man of
mark in the Liberal ranks, independently of the
importance reflected upon him by the constituency
he represents. There is not one of them that can be'
fairly called a man of extreme opinions ; for even '
Mr. Roam:ex will be allowed to be no mob-
flatterer, and Mr. BRIGHT is an intensely " middle-
" class man." An immense majority of the gen.
tlemen who supported Mr. H. BERKELEY'S
motion with their votes are quite as influen-
tial leaders of public opinion es those we have
specified. There can be no doubt that the 222 mem-
bers of the House of Commons—voters, tellers, and
pairs—who on Tuesday night recorded their votes
in favour of the Ballot oonstitute the substantial
strength of the Liberal Party ; and they constitute
one entire third of the representative branch of the
Legislature.
It is rather ominous, therefore, to find opposed to
this phalanx such a large proportion of those whose
claims to office are mainly based upon the belief
that they enjoy the confidence of the Liberal Party.
Let us sore over this dispiriting muster-rell :

MEMBERS OF THE LATE CABINET—Lord PAL-
MERSTON, Sir 0. C. LEWIS, Sir Cl. GRIT, Mr.
LABOOCHIRE, Sir C. WooD, Mr. VERNON Mari%
Mr. M. TALBOT BAINES.

MEMBERS Or THE LATE Gorzarrinuer—Mr. R.
Lowz, Sir A. RemsAy, Mr. I. E. ELLIOTT, Mr.
W. F. Cowrz3.

LIBERAL LEADERS NOT IN THE LATE GOITERIr
lIENTe—LOrd JOHN RUSSELL, Sir F. BARING, Lord
MELOUND.

PFELITES.-Mr. OLADSTONR, Mr. SIDNEY HER-
BERT.

In vain would we attempt to shut our eyes to the
fact. A gulf is opening between the official Liberal.
and the elite of their party, across which ere long it
may be impossible for either to pass to the aid of the
other. The Ballot is only one question ; but it is one
of many which mark the distinction between the
existing generation of Liberals, and the survivors of
a peat generation of Liberals, or those who have
inherited its traditions. In 1830.2 the advocates of
the Ballot were a minority among the already enfran-
chised, perhaps even among those whose enfranchise-
ment was contemplated by Earl GREY'S Reform Bill.
It was easy, therefore, for the Whig leaders to per-
suade public meetings—except in the case of open-
air meetings in the manufacturing districts—to keep
silence about the Ballot, lest dissension should be
introduced into the Reform ranks. It was still more
easy for them to suppress all mention of the subject
in Parliament. Nearly thirty years have elapsed
since that time. Sine. then a new generation
of politicians has emerged into active life, who
take their opinions from the circumstances and
discussions of the time in which they live.
Events have taught men who startled at the
idea of Vote by Ballot as a novelty, and men
who thought nothing about the matter, to recognise
it as an urgent necessity. The language they
hold upon the subject is the first that has been
beard by the younger generation of politicians ;
it has been incessantly dinned into their ears until
it has become part of their po tical treed. The
third part of the House or Commons who vote for the
Ballot represent the existing opinion of liberal
progressive England. The other two-thirds repre-
sent the opinions of the master. of counties and close
boroughs. The official liberals we have enumerated
above must make up their minds to e:7ooee between
the two parties. Whatever their choice, all have no
wish to deny that it will be made in good faith. We
know how difficult it is for men strengthened and
confirmed in their opinions by the conflicts of well
nigh half a oentary to unlearn the lessons of their
youth. But while we shall respect their consistency
we must admit that it relegates them to
political inaction. The adherents of the poli-
tical creed of an extinct generation cannot pos-
sibly be the leaders of a new generation which has
abjured that creed.

We entirely concur in the complaint made by Mr.
BRIGHT of the manner in which this question has of
late years been discussed in the 'louse of Commons.
While the votes recorded in favour of Vote by Ballot
have been steadily increasing, the interest of the
debates has been proportionally decreasing. A few
of the supporters of the Ballot have made it the
groundwork of jocular and telling addressee; the far
greater number have merely made tame duty
speeches in its favour, in order that they
might be able to say to their constituents that they
had spoken for it. But the deep and growing
earnestness with which the great mar of the com-
munity yearn for this boon has found no adequate
echo in the Legislature. In the House of Commons
the supporters of Vote by Ballot argue in its favour
as coldly and calmly as they would demonstrate,
some abstract proposition in EUCLID. They are met,
not by arguments, but by trivial jokes, or by
hau:hty declarations that no concession will be
made. illnourable members complain of the perti-
nacity which !wee them with such a discussion year
after year ; and th, Times, and their other Batumi
in the preen, echo the complaint with ex-
aggerated foppiehnet,...v. But out of doors the
craving for the Ballot is a burning passion.
Every supercilious denunciation of it—every silly
jest at its expense—is recorded and trowured up as