The Express.
London, England, 1866-08-29 00:00:00

OUR CONTEMPORARIES.

(THIS DAY.)

Till REFORM VESTION.
The Times finda fault with Mr. Bright for apply-
ing in him speech at Birmingham the epithets " base " and
" hateful " to the conduct of some of the liberal party in

the house last session, and when he attributed to one of
them a " control" over the Time journal, he not only
stated what was untrue, but what was disproved by every
article it published during the long discussions on the bill.
But, with his accustomed arrogance and impatience,
Mr. Bright expects immediate submission, and is exces-
sively irritated by the slightest delay, the least clog on the
wheel. The Amu defends the course adopted by the liberal

. _
opposition on the ministerial side of the house, and asks
whether there was one amendment from this quarter which
touched in the remotest degree the principle of the bill,
or which did not relate exclusively to such secondary in-
termediate matter of arrangement and machinery as might
form a legitimate subject of difference among men agreed
upon the main object? Can the most ingenious accuser
twist the question of • rent or rating basis cf

Louie valuation into an antagonism to extension of

franchise, or a political condemnation of the artisan class?
_ . . . •

Were the members of the liberal party to have no voice

and no judgment upon these matters? The Timescannot say
this ;but if they had such a right, how could they exercise it
except by proposing amendments' The bill was before the
bonze, and there was no opportunity for the preliminary,
and friendly, and private and informal checks and cau-
tions which a party may administer to its leaders. The
principle of the bill—an extension of the suffrage—is now,
and has long been, secure. Every fresh fact confirms this
principle. The Tina cannot read the revelations recently
made respecting the constituencies of some of our large
towns without arriving at the conclusion that the artisan
elsaa cannot, at any rate, be put below a large portion of
the shopkeeper-electors in honesty and independence, and
that many of them rise high above this leveL
According to the login of toryism, and of that false
liberalism which is not easily distinguishable from tory-
..

lam, the popular desire for reform, observes the Daily
New, is something which may exist out cannot possibly
be proved to exist. If petitions to parliament are few,
they testify only to popular indifference. If they are
many, the signatures have been procured by forgery or
intimidation. Are meetings unfrequent and thinly at-
tended? They show general apathy. Are they, on the
other hand, numerous and crowded? They are instru-
ments of terrorism to which it would be craven to submit.
Assemblies in which men of political eminence take part
are drawn together simply by curiosity to see Mr. Mill, or
to holm Mr. Bright. Gatherings in which the audience and
the speakers are of the same mental and social rank are set
aside as possessing no intellectual or social significance.
But it will not tdo to say that a mid-day assembly of two
hundred thousand persona was drawn into a suburb of
Birmingham in order that an audience of 6,000 persons,
supplied with tickets a week beforehand, might listen to
a great orator in the Town-hall in the evening. Mr.
Bright came to the meeting ; the meeting did not come to
Mr. Bright. Few can read the narrative of what passed
there on Monday without feeling that the tories have
irretrievably lost the opportunity of passing a moderate
measure of reform, which might have given them and
the country peace for a generation. They have sacri-
ficed conservatism to office ; their party to a faction.
The feelings of that party were expressed in Mr. Lowe's
frank declarations against any reduction of the franchise,
and of distrust and contempt for the working classes.
The tories and their Adullamite allies are exclusively re-
sponsible for having brought matters to the present crisis.
The party whichwill not yield reform until it is threatened
with revolution has only itself to blame if the reform
which is at last forced upon it partakes in some degree of
a revolutionary character. Lord Derby has cried "Wolf,"
and the wolf may at last show himself in obedience to the
all.

The Herold admits that the Birmingham meeting was
a genuine one, composed of bona fide working men, and
not, like the aims recent assemblages collected under the
auspices of the Reform League, a gathering of the roughs,
gassing, thieves, and outcasts, of an overgrown city,
brought together by the hope of a row and the possibility
of plunder. The utter futility, however,of such a meeting
as a means of eliciting opinion, diffusing information, or
furthering discussion, is obvious. It is impossible to say
what the real ideas of the crowd were. All who were
present would probably give their voice for reform
of some sort. But the working-men of the iron country
deserve to be led by • better man, and instructed by a
more truthful and temperate speaker than Mr. Bright,
whose whole oration was one tissue of evil counsel, mis-
representation, and vituperation, addressed to men capable
of understanding argument and appreciating decent and
courteous language, if only they had ever a chance of
bearing it. It is absurd, the Herald courteously remarks,
to speak of such a man as honest, or sincere, or useful ; as
a friend of the working classes, or anything but a
mischievous and unscrupulous conspirator against
the peaoe and social order of his country. " Fairly
and freely," the Herald admits that the men who
attended the Birmingham meeting are in favour of a demo-
cratic reform—that is, of being made themselves the
ruling power of the state—and that radicalism is entitled
to whatever credit their adhesion may give it. Only, as
their opinions were known long ago, there is nothing in
their demonstration which ought in anywise to influence
the judgment of parliament or the country upon the
subject.
Mr. Bright, says the Post, may not be inclined to go with
Mr. Bodes to "residential manhood suffrage." He may con-
ceive that Mr. Gladstone will meet him on another " mode-
rate" compromise. But is it honest to trifle with the
working classes in this fashion ? Is it expedient to encou-
rage expectations which can never be realised ? Mr. Bright
may not wish to subvert established institutions, or to con-
trol and overawe the representation. It is incredible that
he has any understanding with Lord Russell, who " has
no fear of freedom," or with Mr. Gladstone, who bas
repudiated all connexion with the league. But, be this
as it may, his speeches lead irresistibly to a conclusion