The Express.
London, England, 1868-10-17 00:00:00

THE WEEKLY PRESS.

The Lomidcn Review remarks that the contrast
between the manifesto of the liberal leader and the war.
whoop with which Mr. Disraeli, laughing all the time in his
sleeve at his followers folly and his own comical figure as
the wielder of .• the protestant Sail," is instructive and
Striking. But while the electors will duly estimate the
difference in every department of the public service
between the statesmanship of Mr. Gladstone and the
clever juggling of the present first minister, the issue of
the impending struggle will be determined in the main by
the measure which the nation will take of the competing
systems of Irbil:policy advanced by the liberal party and
by the irresponsible managers of demoralised conservatism.
Compared with this question all others have, for a time,
sunk into insignificance. There is every reason to be satis-
fied, our contemporary maintains, with the broad outline
of policy which Mr. Gladstone has drawn, and with the
well-defined boundaries of political expediency which he
has fixed as limiting his course of action. So far, indeed,
as the question of disestablishment is concerned, the
policy of Mr. Gladstone is as resolute and clear as that of
Mr. Disraeli is obscure and vacillating.

Commenting upon Mr. Gladstone's addrere, the Saturday
Seder observes that it is more serious and more interest-
ing than Mr. Disraeli's, because it expresses the opi.
nions of a majority. The intentions of the future
minister are more important than the ingenious rhetoric
of his rival. As far below Mr. Disraeli in literary skill as
he surpasses him in oral eloquence, Mr. Gladstone is never.
theism in no danger of being misunderstood. His intellect
has the defect of inability to think of two things at once,
and consequently his political declarations are sometimes
wanting in calmness, in balance, and in reserve; but his
impetuous convictions, if they sometimes make his politi.
cal allies uneasy, are thoroughly intelligible to the mass of
the people. No statesman has for many years been so
strong in the confidence of that vast majority which looks
on political leaden only from a distance. If Mr. Glad.
stone hereafter proves himself qualified to command, he
will have an irresistible force at his disposal, for the ma-
jority of the next House of Commons will be pledged to
register his decrees.

The Exemie.r asks whether ritualism isnot, with its at-
tempt, mortaidivio, to revive priestly power (at a time
when other nations are doing their best to place limits to
its exci sew), stepping beyond the bounds of moderation,
nay, stumbling into excesses which, sooner or later, must
come to ben anise of regret to the clergy as it is a scandal
to the church t There is, indeed, a strong opinion gd g
ground, that priestly influence, under the sanction and
prestige of the church of England, is fast creeping into
our homes. The übliorrence of this secret influence in
our families is as great in this country at the present mo-
ment as it ever was, certainly as great as it has been in
other countries, and with what results to the clergy our
contemporary need not say. The reason is that it threa-
tens our very frenlum. If the question should ever arise
whether the toleration which has been the glory and boast
of England so long should continue, or our freedom be
curtailed, the answer will bo sure, but fatal to that general
toleration and religious liberty of which the clergy hitherto
have Led the greatest benefits.
The Spitint.r declares that Mr. J. 8. Mill is really doing
mischief, both to himself and his party, by his affectation
to give credentials to liberal candidates in search of &seat.
Referring to the letter which the hon. gentleman gave to
Mr. Chadwick, recommendatory of the latter, and him
claims to the electors of Kilmarnock, our contemporary
maintains that this volunteer propagandism of Mr.
Mill is invidious as well as mischievous. lie
writes from Avignon, the abode of a secessionist pope,
almost with the authority,— as well as the humility,—of •
new philosophical lope, and does no good by his lettere.
Thu Sportator Ulll quite believe that he is not exaggerating
when he says that he would put Mr. Chadwick in his
plum it he could. Ile lam chivalry enough for that. But
NM he can't, why scud out his bulls to the people of Kil-
mensal Why can't he lot it alone k

Presidunt Hill, who was inaugurated President
of Harvard College EI. 8., to fill the vacancy caused by
the death of C. C. Felton, in 1n63, baa resigned. Among
those mentioned for the suecomion are Professor Andrew/
P. Peabody, D.D., and lion. J. Lotherup Motley. Other
names suggested are the Rev. T. W. Iligginson, Professor
K W. (lonely, Profaner Charles W. Elliot, Francis K
Parker, and Chief-Justice Bigelow.