The Express.
London, England, 1866-05-15 00:00:00

TEI GOVRILNKILIa ESFORY BILL.

The Times paraphrases Mr. Disraeli's speech last
evening, finding • great deal of truth in his premises,
and much force in many of his arguments, but adds
that though he was so strong in his criticism, he
was powerless as to practical suggestions. If
the Opposition be wise, the Trees thinks, they
will offer all possible assistance in disposing of the
question. Some debate and division may reasonably be
expected on the particular figure of the county and perhaps
of the borough qualification ; the borough leaseholders
must certainly be withdrawn, leaving the borough free-
holders in the possession of their present anomalous privi-
leges ; and • more satisfactory settlement of the question
of boundaries must be devised than the simple plan ad-
vanced by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. It cannot,
however, be pretended that these points offer in-
soluble difficulties; it would be possible in a single
afternoon, much more in • fortnight, to arrive at a prac-
tical, if not complete solution of every one of them ; and,
as Mr. Disraeli declares that there is no difficulty in legis-
lating for want of time, there is some reason to believe
that the session of 1866 may see the termination of an
agitation which has existed with varying fortunes for fif-
L teen years.
The three points in the government scheme of redistri-
bution—the small boroughs, the grouping of represented
towns, and the introduction of the urban element into
county constituencies—which Mr. Disraeli made the ob-
jects of his attack, are, the Daily Hews says, vital to it.
The scarcely disguised aim of his policy is the preservation
of the authority of the territorial aristocracy in the
electoral body, and all that otherwise appears inconsistent
in his criticisms and suggestions becomes intelligible and
harmonious when viewed in the light of his guiding
motive. In his arguments he erred in supposing that
small boroughs are necessary to enable members of the
liberal and learned professors to obtain election, and Mr.
Cardwell showed conclusively that every one of the in-
stances quoted by Mr. Disraeli refuted his general pro-
position. In the question of grouping he failed to per-
ceive that the very neutralisation of personal and local
influences will give special knowledge or eminence freer
course and larger opportunities ; and, experience of
Scotland and Wales shows that grouping is fatal to
bribery, which, to be successfully managed, must be
conducted from • single centre The exclusion on which
Mr. Disraeli insists of all urban interests from the county
constituencies is clearly dictated by the ulterior design
already alluded to—the design to maintain the exorbitant
powers of the landed interest. It is well that the English
people should know whet the conservative idea of reform
is. After Mr. Disraeli's speech there is no room for doubt
on this subject ; and after Mr. Cardwell's reply to it, as
unpretending as it was convincing, there is just as little
room for questioning its extreme impolicy.
According to the Post, the imperfect and unsatisfactory
nature of the measures which the government have sub.
mated for the consideration of the legislature is due to the
mistaken assumption that it was before all things indis-
pensable that a reform bill of some kind, no matter what,
should be carried daring the present year. Accordingly,
ministers, in the view of the Post, would do well to be
satisfied with having elicited from the House of Commons
an assent to the general principles of their measures, and
to occupy the interval between the present and the next
parliamentary session in preparing some comprehensive
bill.

The Herald says that Mr. Disraeli never delivered a
speech of more signal power or of greater value. That it
abounded in wit, that it was adorned by the highest elo-
quence, we need not say. That is a matter of course. Mr.
Disraeli spoke, and Mr. Disraeli never speaks upon& worthy
subject that he does not afford the House of Commons and
the country one of the rarest and noblest enjoyments
that any man of intellect and intelligence GM desire. But
the speech which Mr. Disraeli delivered last night was a
great deal more than a mere oratorical exercitation. It
was a development of reform principles to which even the
government benches could not deny a warm approbation,
and it was a crushing condemnation of the method of pro-
cedure adopted in the government bills. It is beyond all
question, the Herald says, that the government must take

back their bill or go out.
If Mr. Disraeli had ever been a humorous person, the
Telegraph would suspect him of poking fun at the English
people in his proposals, but his address may be taken to
show the nature of the attacks which will be made in
committee. The government bills, the opposition may be
told, will go steadily forward ; the government are resolved
to carry them, or to fall with them; they will give up
nothing of real moment in committee ; and before long
their scheme, and no other, will be made law.
Government, the Star says, have now resolved to unite
the two bills ; and there is to be no prorogation until the
fate of the measure is decided. We may expect some
conflict in reference to the franchise, in which, if truo to
their principles, the liberals will win ; but the tones will
do well to close with the offer which the redistribution
scheme makes them with as little show of dissatisfaction

as they may think appropriate and becoming. If they
refuse it they will never have such a chance again.