The Express.
London, England, 1866-06-22 00:00:00

OUR CONTEMPORARIES.

(THIS DAY.)

TITS MINISTERIAL DEADLOCK.
Assuming it to be the case that her Majesty JO-
sires her present ministry to remain in her service, and ii
ready to dissolve parliament if they wish it, the Times
proceeds to speak of a dissolution as impossible, because
it is so evidently unwise—seeing that there could be no
change in the elections worth the outrage to public feel-
ing. Perhaps a reconstruction is the favourite idea ; and
if Lord Russell and Mr. Gladstone would either retire or
condescend to a lower position in the cabinet, that
would wonderfully simplify matters. As for the scheme of
au entirely new cabinet, it is one that will have to speak
for itself when the names are given. If a neutral premier
can be found—such as Lord Stanley, for example—with
the temper, the abilities, and the personal following for
the office, no doubt there are men of high mark ready to
serve under him, who would not and could not
serve under either Lord Russell or Lord Derby. The
Times concludes with alleging that the country is purely

indifferent on the subject of reform. It will not put a
particle of pressure on its representatives, and till it does
parliament will no more carry Reform than a locomotive
will drag a train at express spied before steam has been
got up.
The Daily Pans says we are waiting for the appearance
of a tory ministry with the impatience of a pit and gallery
which has its hisses ready, but does not see the curtain
rise. We may improve the time by a profitable confession,
namely, that the Russell cabinet committed the
sin so odious to hypocrites of showing itself in
1 earnest on the one question which distinguishes

an honest liberal from an honest tory government. The
gravamen of the charge which the reformers of the new
philosophical school, who, in the simpler ages, would
probably have been described as trimmers, bring against
Mr. Gladstone is that, after having excited the hopes of
his followers by his proved capacity to do plenty of work,
he courted defeat and justified betrayal by doing what he
believed to be his duty. Evidently these philosophical
and disappointed reformers, when they talk of work for a
liberal minister to do, mean work which a tory statesman
will approve, and when they accuse him of alienating his
party, they mean the party who would have supported him
faithfully enough if he had done nothing and stood still,
with all the vigour and capacity of the venerable and
lamented Pococurante.

The Star has reason to believe that the prospect of a
dissolution of parliament becomes more and more clear.
The importance of having the question at issue between
the government and the House of Commons submitted to
the decision of the people is fully recognised by some of
the most influential and eminent members of the cabinet ;
and the Star believes there is not on the part of the Queen
the slightest objection to consent to an immediate dissolu-
tion. When the present government undertook to deal
with the reform question, there was of course a full under-
standing that ministers might be called upon to advise her
Majesty to adopt such a course as that which liberal poli-
ticians now desire—a dissolution of parliament. Nothing,
therefore, stands in the way of a dissolution, and the Star
believes there is good reason to expect that it will shortly
be announced as the policy of the government.
The Post has reason to know that there were eight
members among those who voted in the majority on Mon-
day night who were considered as certain supporters of the
government, and who, up to the very last moment, were
counted by the ministerial w'sips as being onitheir side,
and the result was consequently as astounding to the
Treasury bench as it was unexpected. There is good
reason to believe, the same paper says, that the govern-
ment will elect to dissolve parliament—the dissolution
probably not taking place until the natural/end of the
session. The Post thinks ministers will do well to reflect
before they commit themselves finally to a course which
will save them but for a short time, and will probably do
such permanent damage to the liberal party as it will not
soon or easily recover.
The Herald contains three articles having a bearing
more or less direct on the present deadlock in the
ministry. In the first it states that . Mr. Gladstone's

advice to dissolve has been overruled by the opinion of

his colleagues. He has lost tho confidence of his party
and broken it up, and the Herald has little doubt that the
Queen will find no lack of loyal and generous cooperation

in the formation of a now ministry on a safe and satis-
factory basis. In a second leader the Herald throws back
upon the liberals the accusation which is made against
the tories of &sc.:elating their policy with war
and hostilities. It was Lord Derby's ministry
that first 'recognised tho French Emperor, and
it was Lord Russell wl:o so shamefully abandoned Francis
11. of Naples, following some favourite theory of unifica-
tion or nationalities which is antagonistic to liberty and
constitiNtionalism. The liberal policy can support a
tyranniin America whilst denouncing tyranny in Europe.
Had the conservatives been in power, we should have had
no war in the Crimea, rind have retained the proud dis-
tinction of keeping peace or vindicating the right with
power' and effect. The third article is a denunciation
of the Italian cause—the remarks being based on the
Italian manifesto which has just been promulgated. The
writer insists that amongst the clergy of Italy there is
absolute anal natural discontent, and says it is far too easily
assumed that every order of people in 'Venetia are eager to
be reckoned among the subjects of Victor Emmanuel.
The Te'r9raph, enumerates various reasons apart from
reform why the reins of government should not at this
moment drop from the. hands that hold them, and why an
appeal should be made to the people.