The Express.
London, England, 1867-01-25 00:00:00

BRITA_IIfIA.

THIS ETRanwo, 'rum PRINCItiiOI, THE PEARL ISLAND:
OR, THE THREE KI‘GDOMA UP PEARL, GOLD, AND
SILVER. Met Lane and Mir Jaceba—Ftriteratio Peatomthaitta.
—ARd THE SKJILETUN CREW.

HIGH WATER AT LONDON BRIDGI.

....AfteeZZ SS. Vim
TO-MOSsow—liorshe. 6R A I.nloom, els. Mo.

LONDON, FRIDAY, JANUARY 25.

THE present Ministry is justifying the descrip-
tion given of it very soon after its formation as
the Ministry of the recess. As the Parliamentary
session approaches, it manifests increasing signs of
helplessness. Mr. Disr-tsm is not that daring
pilot in adversity, who, pleased with the danger,
when the waves run high, will seek the stonu ;
but he is a tolerable pilot in deep seas and
smooth water. He can navigate the vessel of
the State under conditions amid which
the vessel of the State might almost
be left to navigate itself. But when
the situation becomes critical, and skilful
seamanship is really required, all he can do is to
hoist signals of distress. Parliament and the
nation are waiting to know what the Government
will do ; and the Government is waiting to know
what Parliament and the nationwill require it to do,
or allow it to leave undone. The proper guidance
which the constitution provides is not forthcoming,
and it seems likely that a part or the whole of
next session will be wasted in indecisive
negotiations and experiments, for lack of
a Minister with courage and capacity to take
the initiative. At any rate, if the Government
has a policy, and the boldness to act upon it,
its organs and supporters do it gross injustice.
The fluctuating rumours which appear from day
to day, and the incidents which generate or con-
firm them, reflect probably, with some accuracy,
the Ministerial bewilderment and uncertainty.
What desperate men may resolve upon at the last
moment is of course beyond the range of compu-
tation, or even of reasonable conjecture. The
plan of the day was not that of yesterday, and
may not be that of to-morrow. As well might
we expect a drowning man to elect beforehand
the plank by which he will save himself and to
go down rather than depart from his election as
look for a steady purpose and course of action on
Reform in the Government of Lord DERBY.

To ordinary minds there would seem to be no
intermediate course between dealing with the
Reform question and refusing to deal with it.
There are lions in both paths. Either alternative
is attended with difficulties and dangers. To avoid
them Her MAJ MTV'S Ministers are believed for
the moment to meditate a line of conduct which
has the singular recommendation of uniting all
the disadvantages of action and of inaction with
none of the credit which a resolute policy
might derive from either. According to a
plausible rumour, they have fallen back, or a
short time since had fallen back, on the profound
statesmanship of Lord ELcno, and think
of referring the subject of Reform to a Royal
Commission. To do so is to declare want of con-
fidence in themselves, in the House of Commons,
and in the nation. It is to suspend the principle
of parliamentary government on the most impor-
tant question which can occupy Parliament, the
reconstruction of the constituent body which
elects the House of Commons. Unsound as we
believe Mr. Dninsem's theories of representation to
be, they are wise and constitutional compared with
the proposed method of procedure. If the Royal
Commission is competent to do what the Cabinet
is unequal to, the Royal Commission should forth-
with become the Cabinet. It may be said that
further information is needed. But it follows,
then, that Mr. DISRAELI'S plans of Reform were
based on insufficient data. The demand fur more
statistics itself assumes a false theory of re-
presentation, that of the so-called balance
of political power, and the artificial
subordination of a majority to a minority of
politically competent persons. It is an obvious
device for evading Ministerial responsibility, and
for retaining office at the sacrifice of all that
makes office honourable. How can the House of
Commons or the country be asked to have confi-
dence in a Government which betrays a complete
want of confidence in itself ?

Another course which has been suggested, and
which probably has been, is, or will be, under
discussion in one or other of the Cabinet Councils
which are now of daily occurrence, is even leis
creditable than the plan of a Royal Commission.
Ministers, it is said, will go to Parliament, avow-
ing themselves without a policy on the subject
of Reform, and will ask the House of Commons
to present them with one. They will admit that
they have opinions on the subject of the represen-

talon, or at least that Mr. Dismal.' has, and that
they say ditto to Mr. Disaastt ; but they will be
quite willing to waive any ideas of their own, and
to do as they may be directed by a majority of
the House. Such, in plain words, and stripped
of plausible circumlocutions, is tho line of conduct
which is marked out for them. A more dangerous
perversion of the true theory of ministerial
responsibility and the dependence of the execu-
tive on the legislature cannot be imagined. For
the confidence of the House of Commons
in the Ministry, it substitutes the confi-
dence, or pretence of confidence, of the Ministry
in the House of Commons. It is not
enough that the Government should obey a par-
liamentary majority, and submit to its dictation.
They should be taken from that majority, and
share in the opinions to which they give effect.
Ministers are naturally the leaders of their own
party, and not the unwilling servitors of the Oppo-
sition. These are truisms ; but they are truisms
which seem in danger of being neglected. If
Lord Demi and his colleagues adopt the proce-
dure which they are thought to contemplate as
a possible way out of their difficulties, they
will cease to be the advisers of the Crown, and
become simply a body of chief clerks and parlia-
mentary draughtsmen.
Only two courses are honourably open to the
Government. It may produce a Reform Bill
framed on the principles which we are told on
authority have the unanimous support of the
Conservative party, and stand or fall by it. Or
it may contend that the advantages even of a
beneficial readjustment are not equal to the incon- '
veniences of disturbing a settlement which in their
view is on the whole satisfactory to the country
and works well, and may therefore refuse to bring
forward any measure at all, standing or falling in
this case also by the determination to which they
have come. Lord DERBY and his colleagues can-
not look for a long or an illustrious term of office,
but it need not be a dishonourable one. If they
cannot serve Parliament and the country, they can
avoid demoralizing them.

OUR CONTEMPORARIES.
(THIS DAY.)