The Express.
London, England, 1866-04-28 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, SATURDAY EVENING, APRIL 28, 1866.

UNDAY• GAZETTE.—A SPECIAL
11.3 ANALYSIS of the DIVION on the BILL
appear with the potitical hews of this dayREYORM 'SUN in the DAY
SAUTIrit of TO-MORSOW.—Order of all news agents and ra-
vel stations, and at the aka, 16, Wellingtonatreet, Strand,
W.C.

JOHN BROGDEN.
ORIGINAL GOLD CHAIN MANUFACTORY,
16, HENRIETTA,STIZET, COVENT-GARDEN.
_ .

JOHN BROODER'S 1)3-carat GOLD CHAINS.
JOHN BROGDEN'S GOLD GUARD CHAINS.

--._:-------
JOHN BROGDEN'S GOLD ALBERT CHAINS.

ti---------OHN BROGDEN'S GOLD BROOCH CHAINS.

PRIZE MEDAL AWARDED.
ALLEN'S
EPENT PORTMANTEAUSrneopenings. and
TRAVLIN AT G
BAGS vrith niu
LADIM' WARDROBE TRUNKS, DRESSING BAGS, with
aver fittings.
DE:MATCH BOXES, WRITING and DRESSING CASES, and
SOO other articles forborne or continental travelling. Illustrated
catalogues post free.
Also Allena Barrack Furniture Catalogue of Portable Bed-
steads, Drawers, Easy Chain, Washhaud stands, Canteens,

. _
post fiat.
J. W. ALLEN, Manufacturer and Patentee 37. Went Strand,
London, WA'.

TURTLE, TURTLE, TURTLE.
ow, Thick, and Invalid TURTLE SOUPS always ready.
ST. HALERJAIIISS'S-ROENTSTREET, PICCADILLY.
ALD, Proprietor.

nit erproso.

HAYMARKET
TAI! Evinego, A ROMANTIC ATTACHMENT. Manna
Oinspwo dW. Ferran Mien AdaCavendiah.—THE FAVORITE
SM' FORTUNE Mews. Buekstone, Chippendale, and *Ahern;
thlppendale, dc—And A DACOHTn. TO MARRY.

PRINCESS'S.
THIS Irsmrso, A OH4MT IN SPITE OF HIMSELF.—After
which THE STREETS OF LONDON. Hews. Vining, T. Mead,
It Murray, Shore, and Villiers ; Mn 11. Marston, and Mime' F.
Illarnett and K. lodgers.

LYCEUM.
Tan EYVcrwes. A DAY AYrK& Till, WEDDING. Messrs.
larsman, Fitzpatrick, sad Clifford ; Mrs. klorsisan, Ac.—And
NAMLAT. Meer► Fechter, Mmery, Addison, Widoicomb, Yule,
Jordan, Fitzpatrick, Ac. ; Mesdames Elsworthy and C. Leclercq.

BRITANNIA.
TRISEVIDiroI, THE SAILOR'S RET U RN. —Thuiramecliraady
—CLOUD AND SUNSHINE Mr. James Anderson.—To con-
clude with THE DARK KING OF THE BLACK MOUNTALNIL
Min Oars 8L Cases Mn S. Lane.

TO CORIMPONDENTS.
Advertisements intended for "The Express," Lnrulon Evening
rimer, must be at the Office, 10, Bouverie street, by Two
o'clock on the day of publication.

MGR-WATER AT LONDON-liftliNir-
THLk DAY —Morning, IA. 13m Afternoon, 1K 33m.
ihk-MottaOw—hiorning, 1k.61m Afternoon, 2h. km.

LONDON, SATURDAY, APRIL 28.

IN the House of LORDS the Marquis of CLAN-
ZICADE presented a petition relating to the fees
payable in Ireland upon the registration of titles
to estates ; and moved for copies of the annual
returns made to the Home-office by Landed Es-
tates Court of Ireland of the business done during
the year by that court, in pursuance of the 25th
mod. of the Act 22nd and 23rd Vict., cap. 72, from
the year 1860 to the last year ; and also, return
of the duty paid upon declarations of title made
and registered in each year up to the present.
In answer to the Earl of Bri.monn,
Lord DuFFERIN said that the subject was under
the consideration of the government.
The returns were granted.
The Public Offices Site Bill was passed through
committee.
The house then adjourned.

Is the Hors?. of COMMONS, the adjourned de-
bate on the Franchise Bill was resumed by
Viscount CKANBOURNE, who, together with Mr.
B. JOHNSTONE Mr. A. GRANT, and Mr. NEWDE-
-13,..TE, supported the amendment.
Captain GROSVENOR observed that all the argu-
ments of the opposition had been directed, not to
the support of the amendment, but against the
principle of the bill. The issue involved was a
judicious extension of the franchise on the one
band, and a monopoly of electoral privilege on the
other ; and he contended that the class which it
was sought to exclude had earned its claim to the
franchise, whether it was a trust or a right, by their
patience, their culture, and integrity.
The O'Dolvotiiirs defined reform to be an exten-
sion of political power to a class now excluded
from that privilege, and, believing that such an
object might be obtained by means of the present
bill, he should support it.
After observations from Mr. HILBERT, Sir M.
BEACH, Mr. BAINES, and Mr. P. A. TAYLOR in
support of the bill,
Mr. R. J. HARVEY, who spoke from the opposi-
tim side, stated that having pledged himself to his
constituents to support every measure that he be-
lieved was for their benefit, he felt it to be his
duty to support the bill.
Mr. W. E. DUNCOMBE succeeded and was fol-
lowed by
Mr. L KING, who almost reproached Lord Gros-
venor for the course he had taken, and signified
that he was content to accept the proposed bill.
Mr. DISRAELI commenced by asserting that
privilege of parliament which he termed the liberty
of legislation, and contended that no par-
liament could be bound by pledges given
by its predecessors ; nor in the present case could
a casual vote in a single parliament bind the legis-
lature now to any particular course with regard to
any measure which might not be expedient, asking
if this parliament was pledged to reform, and
said that there never was a parliament elected
which was less pledged on that question ; for the
late ministry did not go to the country in any way
upon that policy. The house, therefore, was per-
fectly free to act in this matter in the manner
which it deemed best for the country. Pointing
to the different attempts made by Lord Russell to in-
troduce reform bills, he said that noble lord had
broken no vows on that subject ; for he had been ob-
structed and defeated by the liberal party and the
indifference of the country, while Lord Derby and
Lis party had equally fulfilled any pledge that
might have existed in reg9rd to that question. He
laid down that the real origin of the movement in
regard to reform was the speech of Mr. Gladstone,
in which he declared that the franchise should be
based on the rights of man, and that cry
was caught up by an able and active, but small
section of the house, and since then that party
bad been agitating the question until the result was
the piecemeal measure now in consideration, and
-which lie was unable to consider without a know-
ledge of its concomitants. Turning to that provi-
sion of the bill which gives county votes to certain
parsons in towns, he contended that it was calcu-
lated to swamp the county voters. He was pre-
pared to consider a reduction of the county fran-
chise, but it must be a real county franchise, and
not one had made up of urban populations;
and as yet he had no security that
that this anomaly would be remedied by the
undisclosed measure of the government. He pro-
tested against the notion which had been going
about of -disfranchishe, boroughs in the south for
the purpose of enfranchising constituencies in the
north. It was impossible to proceed to deal with
this question without further information, and to
obtain that information was the object of the
amendment. The reduction of the borough fran-
chise was the real cause of the introduction
of this bill, the real object of which

was to extend the franchise to the working classes.
He wished to see the working class element in the
legislature ; but he desired to bee that legislature,
as a whole, so constituted as to be responsible. He
urged that before legislating the house should in-
quire into the results likely to be produced by
edianges in the constitution of the representative
Commons of the country. In 'lndignant terms he
denounced Mr. Knight's attacks on the tory party
and the House of Commons.
The CHANCELLOR Of the EY.c.neQuEn said that it
was now clearly known, on the authority of the

leader of the tory party, that a measure giving the
franchise to 200,000 of the middle class and
200,000 of the working classes, was intended to
revolutionise the constitution of this country. He
declared that Lord Palmerston was in favour
of a reduction of the borough franchise,
and that there never was any
difference
between him and his colleagues on that point;
it was therefore no compliment to that noble
lord to say that he was opposed to all reform. It
was the opinion of the cabinet that no step
should be taken in re to reform until the country
pronounced in its favour, and it was the feeling
evinced at the last election on that subject which
eventually led to the proposing of the
present bill. He denied, though he admitted
that in certain circumstances it would have
been fully justified, that the government had con-
sulted or been influenced by Mr. Brie-ht in deter-
mining on bringing inareformbill, anditsprovisions
and its conduct were their own. He vindicated
himself from the charges which had been made
against him of delivering inflammatory speeclie3
in the provinces, and inflammatory sentences in
to the the workingpaling classes in the house. In
with Mr. Lowe's last speech, he explained
that when he spoke of " knowing with whom he
had to deal," he was not alluding to the house,
but to certain crooked little politicians belonging
to it, and he declared that what the government was
contending for was the extension of the franchise in
principle without absolute reference to derails. The
remainder of his speech was a searching review of
the arguments for and against the measure as indi-
cated m speeches delivered in the debate.
On a division the amendment was rejected by
318 to 313.
The bill was read a second time.
The Criarrcamort of the EXCHEQUER fixed the
committee for Monday, when he would state the
order of business.
The remaining business was disposed of, and the
house adjourned.

THE excitement of an impending division did
not quicken the debate of last night into any
degree of animation, until its closing hours. Then
the encounter of the two great party leaders—
rivals in eloquence, in finance, and in claims on
popular confidence--communicated to it an
energy worthy of the old days of Parlia-
mentary warfare. But until Mr. I:4B)yard
rose, the discussion of yesterday ever ing
dragged wearily on, being confined chiefly to
members whose claims to speak at such an hour
and on such a theme would scarcely bear very se-
rious criticism. The tediousness of the entire dis-
cussion, which has extended over so many days,
has been the subject of general complaint. It has,
indeed, been relieved by speeches which would
have done credit to any Legislative Assembly at
any period. The masterly argumer of
Lord STANLEY, Mr. MILL, and Mr. Lows, the
skilful pleading of Sir HUGH CAIRNS and lir.
COLERIDGE, the elaborate rhetoric of Sir BuLwza
Lvrrott, the purer and more earnest eloquence of
Mr. BRIGHT, and the wonderful examples of de-
bating power with which Mr. Disr-.ELI and Mr.
GLADSTONE wound up the discussion, will live among
the traditions of Parliament, long after the occa-
sion of them has ceased to possess more than anti-
quarian interest. But they are imbedded in a
dull mass of irrelevant nonsense or trite truism.

The languor which pervaded the debate during
the greater part of yesterday evening may be attri-
buted in a large degree to the feeble and in-
effectual speech with which Lord CRANCORNE
opened the discussion. Much was expected from
the member for Stamford. But he justified anti-
cipation only on those points in which it was most
painful. In spite of considerable abilities, Lord
CRANBORNE never fails to drag down every sub-
ject which he touches to a lower level of thought
and feeling than it had occupied before. The
chief impression left upon his hearers yesterday
night was that, if he disliked the Reform Bill
much, he disliked the CHANCELLOR of the Ex-
CHEQUER more. The angry words which are
occasionally uttered in the heat of debate contrast
favourably with the cold malignity-, the dexterously
contrived insinuations, and the elaborate vitupe-
ration of Lord CRANBORNE. The language in
which he gives expression to these feelings is as
worthy of them as it is unworthy of his cha-
racter and of that of the House of Commons.
lit pretending to resent dishonourable impu-
tations, Lord CRANDORNE does not hesitate to
throw out thinly-veiled accusations yet more
odious, nor feel it beneath hint to endeavour to
find in anticipated changes of ministerial tactics
means of aspersion upon personal honour.
The argument of Lord CRANBORNE'S speech was
self-confuting. He anticipates from the Reform
Bill contradictory effects. The working classes,
whom in one sentence he represents as venal
through poverty, and therefore ready to sell
their franchise to the highest bidder, he depicts in
another as earnest politicians, steadily bent upon
ends of their own which they will patiently pursue,
by bombinations and agitation, until they have
succeeded in putting every other order in society,
and all the interests of England which do not
coincide with their own, beneath their feet. Boat
of these descriptions cannot be true. The work-
ing men of England cannot be at one and the
mine time a rabble, indifferent to politics, and
caring only for the money value of their votes,
and an ambitious class, cherishing dangerous pro-
jects, and eager for the suffrage as a means of
giving effect to their favourite ideas. Lord
Casir BORNE will, perhaps, say that his
inconsistent descriptions apply to different
portions of the labouring classes. Eut this
explanation will not serve him. For, in cal-
culating their future strength in the representa-
tion, he assumes that they will all act together for
their sectional interests, in other words, that they
will not be bribed ; while, in estimating the effect
of their inclusion upon the morale of politics, he
assumes that they care nothing at all for public
questions, and will simply sell themselves to the
I highest bidders. Both of these dangers cannot be
real.

Lord CitianioswE's confession of faith, as he
called it, in regard to the working man, seems to
imply that he believes rather in the corruptibility
of the labouring class than in their dangerous
designs. He is kind enough so far to give in to
Mr. GLADSTONeB desh-and-blood doctrines as to
admit that the English working man is made of
the same stuff as his betters, and has the virtues
and vices of his race and nation. But Lord CRAN-
BORNE distinguishes between the artisan's nature
and his temptations. ' His trials are special
to him ; and his poverty almost necessarily makes '
him venal. All this is very plausible, and may
be oti very sagacious ; but Lord CRANBORNE does
not push his philosophy far enough. Poverty is
comparative. It is relative t) the standard of
comfort and the means of livelihood. The embar-
rassed peer or country gentleman, the younger
son or brother, the adventurer of professional and
political life, may often be practically poorer than
the artisan or labourer, who, on Lord CRAY-
BORNE'S theory, must of necessity be venal. But
we protest against this doctrine of the special
purity of the working classes in political matters.
In so far as they can he truly charged with this
fault, they only share the common reproach of
Englishmen. It is vain to say that the corrupted
are many and the corrupters are few ; that the
former are a class, and the latter are merely indi-

viduals. The fact is notorious, that corruption is
a part of the political organisation of England, and
that the general public sentiment only faintly re-
bukes it.

Taking the other view of the working classes,
as political conspirators with secret designs,
which are only now and then incautiously dis-
closed, and to which Mr. Balmer and Mr. J. S.
MILL are parties, Lord CB.ANBORNE is not ashamed
to quote the socialist nonsense occasionally talked
at Reform meetings, as evidence of the projects
which aCT suffrage will be used to effect. The
folly which can attach weight to this idle
talk seems to us more extravagant than
that which indulges in it. Lord CRANBORNE'S
conflicting fears refute each other. They rest on
a defiance alike of arithmetic and of experience.
Figures prove that a£7 franchise will not give
to the working classes predominant power in the
State. Facts show that in constituencies where
they outnumber electors of all other classes, they
do not act together as a class. One thing is quite
clear. They cannot at the same time be the ab-
solute lords and the purchased slaves of the rich.
Nothing has been more remarkable in the course
of this eight nights' debate than the monstrous
disproportion between the terms of the Amend-
ment and the language of its supporters. Never,
we are almost tempted to believe, in the whole
course of our Parliamentary history, was the
manceuvre of a party, or die jealousy of a privi-
leged class, aided by the personal rancour of a few
restless malcontents, wrapped in tawdrier fine.y,
to cover, and to cover badly, more beggarly rags.
Take die leader of the Tory party, for example.
Mr. DISRAELI, who, as all parties have remarked
with regret, has scarcely opened his line this sea-
s'on, was, of course, expected to make an extra-
ordinary effort last night. And the House was
not disappointed. There was much of hie speech,
the beat, though perhaps the driest part of it,
which might stimulate the impatience of a weary
assembly, but could not possibly offend the one
side of the House or excite the enthusiasm of the
other. Mr. DISRAELI began with along and careful
statement on the subject of the county franchise
and the boundaries of parliamentary boroughs ;
arguing with force and clearness, and with perfect
temper and moderation, the propositon that in
many pal is of the country, north an south, the
voters who should properly be'ong to the borough
were beyond its parliamentary limits, and swamped
the county suffrage : in order to justi7y his reluc-
tance to assent to the second reading of a Bill for
the reduction of the Frenchifse in counties aid
boroughs, which leA the question of boundai:cs
in darkness. Such an objection as this, we may
take the liberty to estimate in some
degree according to the objector ; but it
was at least plausible, and quite legiti-
mately introduced into the diLcuss'on of the
Bill or of the Amendment by any mem-
ber of the Opposition. Wnat are you going
to do for the counties, is not an aggressive, a
factious, or an unreasonable question to be put
by the Tot}, chief, though it is one to which any
natural supporter of the principle of the present
Bill would be prepared to wait a day or even a
week for an answer. No Liberal can pretend
to be indignant or surprised that the Tory lerder
should take up the cause of the counties, and
appear painfully anxious to rescue them from the
threatened irruption of a population divorced by
lot and habit from territorial interests and feel-
ings. But the representative of the helpless and
inj tired county electors became transformed in a
moment into a champion of the British Constitu-
tion. After vindicating the independence of the
House of parliamentary pledges, and chivalrously
releasing Lord RUssELL and Lord DERBY from the
burden of ministerial promises on the subject of
Reform, Mr. DISRAELI threw off the modest and
humble cloak of a statistical inqr, irer, and burst
into all the splendour of a great constitutional
defender, in solemn and saddened tones re-
p
roving the member for Birmingham for his at-
tacks
on the House out of doors, and then falling
foul, in the good old slashing style, of the CHAN-
CELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, for his celebrated Wed-
nesday declaration in favour of some sort of
natural and personal right to the suffrage, but
especially fur his " flesh and blood " orations at
Liverpool the other day before an audience
of " provincial fanatics," as Mr. DISRAELI
politely describes Mr. GLADSTONE'S constituer ts in
that famous city. By the way (for even Mr. Dim-
RAELI was unable to avoid the beaten tracks)
he took Mr. MILL to task for what he chose to
assume as the inconsistency of his sup-
port to the Government Reform Bill,
and his published opinions in favour of a system
of checks and counterpoises to universal suffrage.
Here we must do Mr. Disr.AELI the justice to
record that he was much more fair than most of
Mr. MILL'S assailants. He owned that Mr.
MILL had written as an advocate of universal
suffrage, which is a very different thing
from the present bill ; and he even
went so far as to admit that he could see
no danger even in universal suffrage, on
Mr. MILL'S terms. But mark the disproportion
between all this part of his speech for the
Amendment and the portentous defence of
the balanced order of the British Constitu-
tion, with which he strangely prefaced a vehe-
ment and undoubtedly ingenious apology for
the Tory party, the party of peace in foreign
policy and of tender care for the working classes at
home, as instanced by his own reticence during
the American war, by Lord MALMESBURY'S Blue-
book during the Italian war, and by Lo'd JOHN
MANNERS'S Short Time Bills, which Mr. BRIGHT,
as a manufacturer, had opposed. It was not Lord
PALMERSTON, according to Mr. DISRAELI, that
could have saved the unfortunate British
Constitution, had ho lived, but Sir Coax--
WALL LEWIS, whom he lamented as if Sir CORNE-
WALL LEWIS had been Mr. GLADSTONE'S inti-
mate enemy. And the upshot of all this mild
and moderate appeal for information as to the
county franchise as a plea for supporting Lord
GROSVENOR'S amendment, was nothing leas than a
declared resolve to rescue the constitution of the
country—King, Lords, and " the Estate of the
" Commons" (into which he is willing to admit the
choicest of the " handicraftsmen," on the old PLAN-
TAGENET principle)—from the parricidal hands of
Mr. BRIGHT, and Mr. BRIOHT'S " confederates" on
the Treasury Bench, who are conspiring, it seems,
"to reconstruct the British constitution on the
American model." No wonder that as soon as the

furious attempt of the Opposition to silence Mr.
csnwroNE yielded to the calm appeal—" Am I
"to be permitted to proceed r'—the Cass-
em.toa of the EXCHEQUER uttered an excla-
mation of relief at the discovery that a Bill
for the admission of 200,000 of the middle
class and an equal number of the working

class to the electoral franchise in counties and

boroughs was interpreted by the leader of the
Tory party as a conspiracy to reconstruct the
British constitution on the American model ! His
masterly speech worthily concluded this great
debate, and was immediately followed by the
critical division for which the whole country has
been eagerly waiting.

OUR CONTEMPORARIES.
(THIS DAY.)

THE DIVISION.

The division on the second reading of the Reform
Bill not taking place till nearly half-put 3 this morning,
the comments of the daily journals are necessarily
scant and hurried. The Times regards the result as •
practical defeat of the government, and a vote of censure
on the line of conduct they adopted. It compliments
Mr. Disraeli upon the justness of his arguments. What-
ever else may happen, it says, no administration
will henceforth hope to persuade the House of
Commons to consider proposals of Reform without
laying the whole of their scheme before it. Whether
those who persisted in forcing upon their re-
luctant followers, and, if report be true, their
reluctant colleagues, a plan so disrespectful to parliament
and so full of danger to themselves, can survive the vote
of this morning, remains to be seen. It may be that they
will accept the rebuff ; it may be that they will expiate
their error in retirement. Something must depend upon
their own self-respect ; something, perhaps, on the tem-
per of the House of Commons ; something upon the spirit
of colleagues who have hitherto been so culpably obse-
quious.

The Poet goes so far as to say that the defeat is fatal
and that nothing remains for ministers but to resign. Mr.
Gladstone 's speech, as a defence of reform, as • reply to
the arguments and the apprehensions of those who avowed
their hostility to the ministerial measure, and as an answer
to much that was personal in the attacks made upon him-
self in the course of the debate, and especially in the
speech of Mr. Disraeli, was unrivalled as a display of par-
liamentary eloquence. But it did not furnish what im-
partial individuals will consider • justification of the policy
pursued by the government in introducing their measure.
The government, says the Herald, which boasted of •
clear liberal majority of from 70 to 80, has contrived to
vary the second reading of the Reform Lill by five ; the
numbers being for Lord Grosvenor's amendment 313, for
the second reading of the bill 318. It is obvious that the
bill is lost. But whether the government will abide by
its pledges, and fall with its bill, we are to learn on
Monday.

The Star cannot congratulate either the house or the
country on the result of last night's momentous division.
A ministerial majority of no more than five bodes ill for
the early and tranquil settlement of the reform question.
We must look forward to new delays, fresh difficul-
ties, prolonged intervals of complication and confusion.
Mr. Gladstone's speech was a most triumphant vindication
of the conduct of the government, not merely on technical
grounds, but on principles which will at once commend
themselves to the mind and the heart of the country. The
great question of reform has rarely received zo vivid and so
ardent an elucidation. When the great objects now being
striven for have long been gained, this noble oration, deli-
vered with masterly power and self-possession at a moment
of remarkable criths, will be treasured as a manual of popu-
lar progress and hope.

Our weekly contemporaries have been compelled to write
before the result of the division was known, and this
fact deprives their criticisms of most of their points.
The Sulurday Amino hopes that whatever happens
the government will remain in office, or that no large
amount of precious time may ke lost in constructing a new
one. It will be well if Mr. Gladstone at the last moment
gets himself out of the difficulty he has created, and
makes a concession that will i'i•orm a loge portion o: the
opposition, or if he does not go out of office mere')
in pique and from an obstinate pi:de, but accepts
what is the real wish of pall-Aleut and the
country, that a liberal ministry should remain in office,
and that, after having well matured and considered the
whole scheme, it should bring in a comprehensive mea-
sure. Mr. Bright is probably quite right in ....yin that,
whatever may be the fate of this bill, and whatever may
b. 3 the effect of the division on the winistry, a reform bill
w:11 be carried before long ; but we do not think he is a:
all right in pronouncing that the bill which is inevitable
must also inevitably be less moderate than any that have
been proposed.

To the Examiner it seems that in case the further pro-
:,ress of the bill seems impossible parliament should l
dissolved. For what would be the position of a conserva-
‘2ve government in the face of an opposition of more then
half the house? The combination that helped them to
victory would not survive the occasion, and would
begin to crumble away from the time that the purpose
was served. The conservative government would then
soon find itself at the head of about 290 staunch followers,
opposed to about 340 or 350 liberals. Is this, or any-
thing like this, a state of things that Lord Derby
and Lord Stanley would brook, not to mention °ther
high-spirited members of their party? The first ini-
portant division would compel the conservative ministry-
to dissolve ; and would the appeal to the country
be more favourable to the liberal party under an
adverse government than it would have been under Lord
Russell's administration ? To state the question is to
answer it. If, then, to this complexion we must come at
last, if dissolution there must be either in the hands of
friends or enemies, surely there should be no doubt about
the choice. It may seem good party tactics to resign , and leave
a conservative ministry face to face with an overwhelming
opposition ; but the conservatives will not be so simple r
to accept that situation of difficulty, and for fear o
making matters worse they will not shrink from the only
expedient to make them better. And they would pro-
bably not only hold their own, but get something to bout.
Thus they would have all the advanta3e which the liberal
ministry would have foregone in declining an appeal to
the country. It is due to the country to let its voice be
distinctly heard as to the great question affecting its
dearest interests, and by no other way can the desirA
settlement be had.

The Siertatur thinks that if the majority is a minute
one, or such that Mr. Gladstone will not, or cannot,
remain in power, a coalition of which Lord Stanley
would be the leading spirit would be nearly inevitable.
Many liberals have confidence in Lord &Ailey, the bulk of
the tory party would follow him as their bent alternative,
and the mass of the undecided would be pretty sure to ap-
prc.e his administrative measures. He would be as little
likely to plunge us into a war with America as Earl Rus-
sell, and might by dint of audacity and painstaking prepare
a reform which both parties could accept as a settlement of
the question, a reform which, admitting the workmen to a
hundred seats and redreuing the balance as between
North and South, should not establish a precedent leading
directly to numerical rule. If he could but rid himself of
Mr. Disraeli either by sending him to the Peers or to
Paris, or to both, he might found an administration which
could really work, which would at intervals hold power
for considerable periods, and which would in the end re.
model the platform of the great Conservative party.