The Express.
London, England, 1866-04-24 00:00:00

OUR CONTEMPORARIES.

(THIS DAY.)

THE REFORM DEBATIS.-MR. BRIGHT'S SPEECH.

Mr. Bright's speech last night is no more satis-
tory to the Times than the other speeches on the same side
which have preceded it. The hon. member does not princi-
pally shine in argument, and yesterday he condescended to
reason with his opponents. His opinion that the power
of giving a vote for a member of parliament is a right,
and that the redistribution bill is a matter of
political expediency, is a notion to be entertained
in the babyhood of political science. His asser-
tion that the power of any class of voters
depends upon the distribution of seats is sufficient to
justify a demand for the entire scheme. For the rest, the
Times sees in the speech a confession that the method of
dealing with reform in fragments is due to the advice of
Mr. Bright, tendered in a chance conversation with Lord
Russell six or seven years ago, and repeated in his speech
at Rochdale last January. Mr. Mill has up to this time
proved the strongest supporter of the government, but
between Mr. Bright and Mr. Mill the Times discerns a
fundamental antagonism. Cheerfully acknowledging the
lustre which his eloquence has conferred upon the House
of Commons, and the signal benefits which, as an advocate
of free trade, he was among the foremost in securing for
his country, the Times nevertheless cannot be blind
to the puerilities of his political philosophy. Never was
the narrowness of his political creed more openly ex-
hibited than last night, and never, our contemporary is
glad to believe, was it more plainly rejected by the
House of Commons.

The Daily News observes that Mr. Bright was moderate
and conciliatory almost to tameness, sacrificing the
opportunity of a brilliant oratorical display to the better
securing of one of the chief objects of oratory—persuasion.
As he pointed out, Lord Derby's bill would have given the
suffrage to a larger number of persons. This measure
is disagreeable to the tones, simply because it proposes
to give votes to the working classes, and this fact renders
it lees likely that they will be impressed by the evidence
which exists of the inaccuracy of the figures, professing
to show the number of working men in the constituencies.
Their theories of representation agree in nothing but in
their tendency to further the designs of the political
monopolists. The class-theory is put forward by Sir Hugh
Cairns, and almost contemptuously rejected by Mr.
Walpole ; the proposition that personal fitness for
the suffrage is a title to its possession is advanced
by Sir Bulwer Lytton, and scouted by the honorable
and learned member for Belfast.

In another article, referring to the increased
number of defections from the ministerial ranks
and to the successive decisions of election committees,
the Drtifjf News remarks that we must be pre-
pared to see the second reading passed by a majo-
rity so small as to leave no reasonable prospect of
carrying the bill through the snares and pitfalls which will
await it in committee. The government have no doubt
considered this probability, and sincere liberals will accept
their determination with satisfaction, whether it involves
a dissolution of parliament, with all its efforts and sacri-
fices, or the resignation of ministers and the accession
of their opponents to office. They will be satis-
fied with anything rather than the abandonment for
one moment of the cause of reform. Now that that
grave question has been honestly raised it cannot be put
to sleep until it has been fairly and finally decided.
Whatever else may happen, there can be no transaction
between ministers and the opponents of reform. A fear-
ful political demoralisation went on under the administra-
tion of Lord Palmerston, and unless a radical cure can be
found the liberal party is already undone. The advent of
the conservatives, or of the "muddle party," of which we
hear so much, is far front being the worst thing that might
happen. If Lord Stanley is growingout of his early liberalism
and ripening for his peerage, let him place himself at the
head of an anti-reform administration. Let Lord Malmes.
bury again manage our foreign affairs, and Sir S. Northcote
be set to make our budgets ; further, if they please, let
them call to their aid the popularity of Mr. Lowe, and the
confidence-inspiring genius of Mr. Laing. Such a ministry
would be bound to oppose reform. but it would infallibly
prove the precursor of a reform administration upon whose
feebleness no Grosvenors nor Horamans would venture to
experiment.
The Past finds Mr. Bright's speech heavy and dull. It
sincerely believes he is actuated by a desire to benefit his
country, but he would do so by completely subverting the
national institutions. According to the Pod, the founda-
tion of a new and formidable combination between the
opposition and a portion of the liberal party has been
firmly laid, and the country would approve of a govern-
ment formed out of these materials expressly to settle the
matter of reform.
To the Herald Mr. Bright proves that the government
has elevated trickery into a principle, and seeks to take
credit to the House of Commons for a dirty mameuvre.
The hon. gentleman fell far below his own level, and Mr-
Whiteside put his inconsistencies in the strongest light.
Mr. Walpole, too, vindicated the amendment with un-
answerable logic.
The scene in parliament last evening, the Teie!rraph
says, must have satisfied any man of the vast acknow-
ledged influence which Mr. Bright exercises in parliament
and in the country. His speech was singularly moderate
and calm. It will not be rational for tones and for liberal
' Iconservatives, after the country has read the speech, to
talk about " considering" reform while they vote for Lord