Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1859-04-13 00:00:00

e advertise

THE NORTHERN TIMES WEDNESDAN, APRIL 13, 1859

dom,- is, whether the Bill proposed by the Govern-
ment was good or bad ; and whether the Govern-
ment were right in proposing such a Bill, or whether
the majority of the House of Commons were right in
disapproving it. This question having been put to
the electors of the United Kingdom, I cannot doubt
what their answer will be." This course, on the
part of one who is regarded as the leader of the
Liberal party, is considered, we find, quite as unsatis-
tory as Lord JOHN'S plan of a " moderate reform,"
as propounded to the City of London, has been. And
one of the more popular of the Liberal journals—the
Star—says that, according to Lord PALMERSTON, "It
is not the future policy of the present or any other
Administration—not the nature and extent of the
reform desired—on which the country is called upon
to pronounce judgment, but the merits or demerits of
a scheme so utterly defunct, that its own authors
are fain to bury it out of sight and memory." Then,
on the same popular authority, it is to be concluded,
it seems, that the ex-Premier is only having recourse
to devices for the purpose of creating a " diver-
sion from the pursuit of Reform." And
it is then ironically declared, that " surely one
or both of these devices must avail to pre-
vent the inconvenient inquiry—Why do you,
Lord PALMERSTON, object to those- measures of
Reform for which the country has so loudly called ?
or why do you differ from the still more moderate
proposals of Lord JOHN RUSSELL? and on what
pretence do you still claim to be the leader of the
Liberal party ?" These are questions, however,
which certainly involve important issues for the
Liberal party; because they have to do with the

position of a statesman who has been, in Parliament,
at least, one of the mainstays of its cause throughout

periods of no ordinary difficulty.
Another prominent and influential Liberal, Mr.
HORSMAN, put the case in a very different light to
his constituents of Stroud. " I gave you an assur-

' he says to them, "of which you entirely
approved, that I . would extend to the forthcoming
Reform Bill of the Government' the fullest and
fairest consideration, unbiassed by party views ; and
I stated that, while I was prepared to support a good
measure, I should be equally anxious to amend it if
it were a bad one. That pledge I have endeavoured

to redeem, and, if the course which I advocated had
been adopted by the House of Commons, the labours
of the session would not have proved barren, but a
measure would have been passed giving a large
extension of the franchise to those who are now

excluded from it, and they would have been enabled
to exerciscr their new privilege at the ensuing elec-
tion. I regret much that by the adoption of an
opposite course all legislation on reform has for the
present been defeated, the just claims of the
unenfranchised indefinitely postponed, and the sit-
tings of the legislature suspended at a most
critical moment, when the question of peace or
war is hanging in the balance." Here, then,
while the question of Reform is given its full share
in having caused the appeal about to be made to the
country, it is left to be inferred that a large measure
of Reform, " giving a large extension of the suffrage
to those who are now excluded from it," may be con-
fidently calculated upon, even should the General
Election result in securing the present Administra-
tion a Parliamentary majority.
And here we would digress for a single moment, to
notice the official denial that has been given

in the House of Commons, to the assertion that the
present Ministry, should the appeal to the country
be so answered as to enable them to retain office, did
not intend to bring forward again any measure of

Reform. The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER
has • emphatically contradicted the idea, which Sir
JAMES GRAHAM has made so strong a point, of the
question that is submitted to the constituencies being
" reform or no reform." The right hon. gentleman
has declared to the House of Commons, that he and
his colleagues are at perfect liberty to bring forward
another measure on the subject. " I consider," he
added, " that the Conservative party have peculiar
facilities for • dealing with the matter ; what has
occurred has not changed that opinion, and I would
wish to bring forward a measure to settle the ques-
tion as far as it can be settled, for a considerable.
time." So that let who may be Minister the ques-
tion of a Reform in Parliament is sure to be dealt
with immediately; and it is therefore for the country
to return such a House of Commons as will take care
that any measure of reform to be adopted shall be
one that will really and truly, be an improvement of
the representation of the people.

But to return to the consideration of the real
nature of.the appeal to the country. The Under-
of State (Mr. HARDY) tells his consti-
tuents,—" An unusual if not an irregular method has
been adopted to obstruct and overthrow the Adminis-
tration, and the result proves that her Majesty's
Ministers can no longer depend upon the impartiality
or forbearance of the present House of Commons. A
majority composed of different sections, under
different leaders, each with a different scheme and a
different object, has refused even to discuss an im-
portant measure proposed by the Government, and a
momentary unanimity has been obtained by means
of a subtle and vague resolution." This, then, is the
the cause of the appeal having to be made. Its
object is set forth in what he adds, when he says,—

Secretary

" Divided among themselves our opponents are not in
a position to form a permanent Government, while
the present Ministry may at any moment he defeated
by their combination. Yet a strong Government is
essential to the best interests of the country, for con-
tinual changes interfere with domestic legislation,
and imperil the influence of England with foreign
nations." This is putting the case explicitly enough.
Her Majesty's present Ministers want a Parliamen-
tary majority; and they have persuaded themselves
that this appeal to the country will give them such a
majority.

The First Lord of the Admiralty (Sir JOHN PAK- I
INGTON) has placed the matter before his constituents
in a similar, but perhaps a still stronger light—" At
a moment," he says to them, "of great public diffi-
culty—at a time when a firm attitude on the part of
England is essential to the maintenance of peace in
Europe—at a time when the House of Commons Was
pledged to give ' calm and impartial consideration'
to the great subject of Parliamentary Reform, the
leaders of Opposition have thought it consistent with
their duty to refuse even to consider a Reform Bill,
and have preferred to make the Bill an excuse for a
factious motion and a party attack." And then, as
to the question which the country is called upon to
answer—and to answer, let us hope, rationally yet
liberally—popularly yet patriotically,—" the issue
to be decided," he says, "is simple and intelligible.
On the one hand, moderate reform and progressive
improvement. On the other, an unsettled policy,
likely to end in democratic innovation and revolu-
tionary change." Of course it is for the country to
interpret these phrases as it thinks they deserve, so
as to give full force "reform and improvement ;" and
to put its own estiroato upon the apprehended risk of

democratic innovation and revolutionary change.
These would be excesses which we do not think
there can possibly be any desire among the great
body of the present Parliamentary constituency to
see perpetrated. But we believe the country does
want a liberal and effectual measure of improvement
in its Parliamentary representation; and we feel
satisfied, that whomsoever its answer to the
approaching appeal may place at the helm of affairs,
such a measure must be produced and passed, ere
a sound public opinion will be propitiated by her
Majesty's Government,—be that Government, we say,
composed of whom it may.