The Express.
London, England, 1867-02-13 00:00:00

THE REFORM REsoLETIoNA OF THE GOVERNMENT.

The Tims•s would judge the sincerity of the
House of Commons on the subject of reform by the
manner in which it deals with the ministerial proposals—
putting on one aisle those who would oppose the going into
committee, and on the other the members who would be
fur adopting what appears to be sound, rejecting what is
incurably vicious, and amending what is capable of
amendment. Condemning Mr. Disraeli for the course be
adopted in wasting an evening on a dreary and unconci-
liatory retrospect, instead of stating the reasons for the
respective resolutions, the Tillies proceeds to avoid this
error by discussing them seriatim. The first four, it
would be supported by large majorities, if not
with unanimity, but then they do not touch the difficulty;
and as to the fifth the Times its satisfied that a plurality
of votes will never be sanctioned by the present house.
The suggestion that each voter should be at liberty to give
the two or three votes he can now distribute among as many
candidates to any one candidate cumulatively seems the
simplest plan of solving the problem—at least, where there
is more than one member to be returned. Everything
turns upon the solution of this central question, and if
parliament rejects, as it must, the government proposals,
it must find a substitute. The concluding resolutions, if
they are ever reached, will probably be as little opposed
as those that come first. The government has professed
in very bumble language its willingness to be guided, and
it becomes incumbent upon the House of Commons to
accept its part of the responsibilty.

The Doi le News observes that Mr. Disraeli could not
resist on Monday, though an occasion which ought to
have been one of business, to deliver himself of what his
admirers call a grand constitutional oration,—even place
and power seeming to be less dear to him than en oppor-
tunity of personal display. The judgment passed on the
resolutions in the house itself, including the ministerial
side, was one of instant and almost unqualified condemna-
tion. It is a waste of time to discuss the second reso-
lution, the propriety of fancy franchises, without deter-
mining what the fancy franchises shall he. This scheme,
thus hinted at, and the timid suggestion of plurality
of votes thrown out in the fifth, appear to foreshadow
devices for rendering of no effect that reduction
of the borough franchise which we know, by his re-
iterated assertions, that Mr. Disraeli and his party con-
sider to be a degradation, and regard as inexpedient except
in so far as it is unavoidable. But the scheme of plural
voting, which has an apparent precedent, but no real
sanction in our local institutions, is so invidious, and
could so little be made to correspond with that real mental
superiority which, besides, can dispense with artificial aid,
that it must be looked upon us an indirect expedient for
making the Home of Commons the representative of a
plutocracy. The resolutions which follow seem to be in-
troduced for the purpose of consuming the time of the
house in barren controversies—the last especially betraying
the design of the government to adjourn legislation at least
to the next session. Her Majesty's ministers have courted
defeat, in the least creditable shape—not as honourable
comlsitants, but detected and discomfited inameuverers.
A perusal of the resolutions leads the Piot to think un-
favourably of the government policy. Those which are
not truisms involve propositions which the Post doubts
whether any representative assembly would be justified in
adopting in an abstract form, and on the whole it must
pronounce the opinion that the government have been un-
fortunate in their mode of dealing with the most impor-
tant question which will be submitted to parliament dur-
ing the present session. 'Were the laird/ter' to continue
iu office after the rejection of their proposals, a vote of
want of confidence would probably be paused. No matter
what the Chancellor of the Exchequer may say to the
contrary, he and his colleagues must stand or fall with
any important measure which they submit for the reform
of our system of parliamentary representation.
The Hessi/4/ is inclined to believe that the ministry have
committed an error in tactics in not producing the re-
solutions while seeking to justify them. But this
is only an additional proof of their good faith.
There is no humiliation, the Herald continues to argue,
in the ministry submitting the conduct of reform to the
house. It is on the fifth resolution, that of plurality of
votes, that the greatest controversy will arise, and for this
the Heroid claims the votes of Mr. J. B. Mill and his fol-
lowers. Upon the whole the resolutions may be said to
have been most skilfully and carefully designed to embody
the most liberal and comprehensive scheme of parliamen-
tary reform which was ever Laid before the people of this
country.
The Tdegraisl devotes three leaders to Mr. Disraeli
and his scheme. The broad question submitted to the
liberal party is whether it should seriously debate the
resolutions with a view to amendment. &me days
must elapse before the subject can be taken into re-
gular consideration ; but the Tthyntpl4 will at once
declare the judgment which has been pronounced by
public opinion. The vagueness of the resolutions is
said to have dismayed even members of the Cave ; con-
servatives have been taken aback by more than one of the
fanciful traits shadowed forth in the project ; and sound
liberals have at once perceived that the plan, both in its
details and as a whole, is utterly unworkable. Any
attempt to amend it would simply be an acceptance of a
share in the political bankruptcy which surely awaits its
promoters. •

- The resolutions are divided by the &ar into three
classes. Find, platitudes which ought to be at once erased
as inane and useless; second, made schemes of which
no one can pretend to judge until other crude schemes
have first been considered, hammered into shape, and if
acceptable passed into law; third, propositions which
ought to be at aisle rejected. Could any desirable end be
gained by entering upon the serious consideration of such
a " basis of settlement "! It seems to the &ar that there
is only one course which the liberal party ought to pursue,
and that is, to declare at once that the tories have again
proved themselves utterly incapable of dealing with the
imestion of reform.