The Express.
London, England, 1867-05-03 00:00:00

THE DEPEAT OP THE GOVERNMENT.

The Times cannot suppose that there will be
any hesitation on the part of the government in accepting
the reduction of the term of residence from two years to
one, and in assenting to the removal of one of the greatest
blots in the ministerial scheme. With the exception of
the world of officials and agitators, everyone, the Times
says, is now persuaded that the proper plan of dealing
with the government scheme is by the alterations
of detail like that carried last night. The strongest
argument against the two years proposal, was not
that it would keep large numbers off the register,
but that a distinction in the term of residence of dif-
ferent classes of voters is in the highest degree in-
vidious, and in practice would produce constant resent-
ment. The discussion of bat night, at once brief and
exhaustive, may be regarded as an earnest of the future
temper of the committee, and as a promise of that unison
of feeling between the government and parliament which
makes a legislative settlement of reform a matter of reason-
able certainty.
The Daily News jokes at the stern resolution of the
liberal secessionists to do at all hazards by their vote
what they had been previously informed by the go-
vernment they might do without any risk to the
ministry or the measure. Mr. Disraeli in stating that he
could not proceed with the bill until he had taken counsel
with his colleagues was simply acting—doing so for the
benefit of credulous conservatives as well as misguided
liberals. He probably desires to have the credit of making
an important concession, in order that he may exact, in
recompense, a more serious sacrifice from the liberal party.
Through the veil of his ambiguous language in reply to Mr.
Forster, it may be seen that while the commuted rate only
is exacted from the compound householder above 107., the
government will insist on the full rate being paid by the
compound householder below 101.—exempting the com-
paratively rich and extorting the uttermost farthing from
the comparatively poor. But if the House of Commons
has any consistency, this fine must go the way of the two
years' residence and of Lord Grosvenor's .if. rating scheme.
Possibly both provisions were framed to be abandoned
under pressure. They may have been babe. to be thrown
to the wolves. But it will require many such successes
as that of hat night to make the bill even temporarily
acceptable to the country.
The Herald thinks we may fairly assume that the
Cabinet will accept the alteration, especially as it considers
that the adoption of it will make further antagonism im-
possible for the great mass of liberal members.

The conduct of the Chancellor of the Exchequer is no
leu a surprise to the Standard than it was to the house ;
for to dissolve on the point is impossible, and to resign
would be preposterous. It regrets, as a circumstance fruit-
ful of misconstruction and unjust imputations, that minis-
ters had not determined beforehand to accept the decision
of the house, be it what it might, and proceed with the
bill lest night, as they certainly will do on Monday. What
point of etiquette, what requirement of public business,
could compel ministers to deliberate after a defeat which
they had evidently expected and almost invited, the Stand-
ant cannot guess.

In the opinion of the Pali the " crushing defeat" which
the government sustained last night will probably seal the
fate of the Reform Bill. The amendment etrikcs at the
very root of the biU, immensely increasing the number of
new electors.

The Mar imagises there is little doubt of the result.
Ministers have been beaten upon the lent popular feature
of their bill, sad Mr. Disraeli will probably persuade them
to simulate submission. At least it will have the silvan-
tags of securing a little longer tenure of office, and if the
worst comes to the worst, a less absolute defeat may be
courted on some less obnoxious portion of the bill.
The Day sees no reason why ministers, who avowedly
are the ministers of a minority, should accept this defeat
in any very serious spirit. Between two years' residence
and one there is really no principle at issue. It is only a
question of degree. To abandon the bill would be a con-
tradiction of all those assurances which, at intervals
throughout the session, have given so much satisfaction to
the public.