The Express.
London, England, 1866-06-25 00:00:00

THZ lIINISTSBLAL POSITION.

The Times suggests that the intervening time
since the adjournment of the House of Commons has
brought opportunities of re-consideration to the govern-
ment and made them disposed to milder councils. It was
perverse in the extreme to treat the success of Lord
Dunkellin's amendment as fatal to the Reform Bill,
and the result of an appeal to the country under
mash circumstances was more than doubtfuL It would be
vain, however, to pretend that the adoption of • vote of
confidence en the proposal of some independent sup-
porter is a perfectly satisfactory plan of evading the
difficulty. It offers • way of escape, and that is almost
the best that can be mid of it. If the House of Commons
is willing to become sponsor for the good intentions of the
ministry, and to declare its readiness to consider in a
liberal spirit any reform bill which may be brought in next
session, such • declaration secures everything which the
ministry can wish.
The Daily News observes that the retirement of the
present government would inevitably and speedily be
followed by a dissolution, and Lord Derby could only
accept office with such a prospect. A mixed or neutral
government under the presidency of Lord Stanley, if
it survived the mutual jealousies of its members, could not
face the house for a week. To look to Lord Stanley to
renew the golden age of Palmerstonianism is to in'
dulge in the most absurd and childish of illusions.
As • resignation therefore means dissolution, the
only hope, slight at the best, of avoiding a dis-
solution is in avoiding a resignation, and this
can only be done by the house expressing in some way
conformable to rule and usage its readiness to accept a
reduction of the borough franchise equal to that contained
in the government bill. A vote of confidence couched in
general terms will not meet the necessities of the occa-
sion. What is required is a vote in favour of a specific
enlargement of the franchise.
The Post condemns the suggestion of • dissolution in
general terms, though it acknowledges that the project is
popular in the " ministerial districts."
The Herald describes a dissolution as a " high-handed
outrage for which Mr. Gladstone pants," but the Queen
and the bulk of the liberal party 11:11 defeat it.
The proposal of a vote of confidence is about the worst
imputation that has been cast at the ministers, and, though
Earl Russell and Mr. Gladstone might be willing enough to
hold on to place by such a vote, they dare not stand the
debate which the proposal would provoke. They would
appear in it before the country in so ridiculous or so mean
• light that even our rhinoceros-skinned Premier would
be cut to the quick.
The Telegraph says if the proposal of a vote of confi-
dence be made by the Adullamites in terms so submissive
that the government can withdraw their ultimatum, the
tories are condemned to silence. For them such a majo-
rity would be fatal, since it would express the consterna-
tion of parliament at the result of the recent vote. From
ministers the case will demand careful and earnest con-
sideration ; and the prayers of the House for a respite
can be acceded to only when circumstances have proved
th tt neither political morality nor the cause of reform can
in the slightest degree suffer from an act of semi-contemp-
tuous toleration.

The Star hopes that the stratagem of a vote of confidence
may not have to be seriously considered, and that a prompt
determination to dissolve the parliament may render super-
fluous the adoption of such a plan. It would not be
impossible, however, to draw up a resolution which,
if carried, would reconcile the country to a few months
delay, and 'Mist.), the public that the question of reform
was not being trifled with, hut whether a majority of the
house would alopt such a resolution is another matter.