The Sun.
London, England, 1864-12-30 00:00:00

in the matter. The representatives did not want
the bread themselves, BO they cared very
little whether or no their neighbours
starved for want of the half loaf. With
such indifferent or careless critics Lord JOHN
RUSSELL'S shuffles about Reform passed by more
easily than they deserved until he finally escaped
from inconvenient queries and home thrusts to the
quiet shadows of the House of Peers. In exchange
for that earldom Lord J. RUSSELL gave his long-
cherished and hardly-won reputation as a Reformer
gained in the great constitutional battles of 1831-32.
He gave also a large portion of that popular respect
and sympathy which his earlier career bad attached
to him, and certainly his administration of our
foreign affairs has not tended to regain the appro•
val which his domestic policy had forfeited. Since
the abandonment of all Lord RUSSELL'S professions,
Reform;has been quietly thrust aside by the Govern-
ment, and whenever a complaint has been made it
has been met by the answer that there was no
popular action on the subject, but that the people
had grown indifferent. The fact is that they have
become disgusted with the want of faith shown
by their political leaders, and look on professions
of a reforming policy almost with ridicule. But
this state of things cannot last for ever, and the
existence of a well-founded dis Content among the
masses is not a symptom that any statesman can
afford to trifle with. In a country which, like
England, is professedly self-governed, it is n 6
slight grievance for large bodies of thinking, in-
telligent men to be shut out from all participation
in the politics of the State. They have as deep
an interest in the welfare of the country as those
above them in the social scale, while the
question of finance and taxation are certainly
even more important to them. How is it, then,
that while all sides admit their right to the
franchise, all shrink from extending it to them.
Very certainly the possession of political power
would, in these days, 'be much more safely trusted
to our better class of mechanics and artisans than
it would have been fifty years ago to the hands of
the lower middle classes. If men have learnt no.
thing else by the eventful history of the last half
centure, they have at lease learned to be temperate
and cautious ; and in most branches of our policy we
are now more likely to err on the side of prudence
and toleration than of that rashness and prejudice
s) perceptible in much of our earlier legislation.
There is some truth in the allegation of popular in.
difference on the matter, though not as affects the
classes most concerned. The £lO householders are
net over anxious to share their power with those
below them, and take very little interest in the
matter. They do not exert the influence which
they possess by extorting from the candidates for
their suffrages a pledge to support Reform. They
shrink from the extension of the franchise, as it
will necessarily lessen their importance in the eyes
of the candidates, and they look with no favourable
eye on the natural ambition of those excluded
from the pale of the constitutien. But this is
neither fair to the Parliament nor to the people,
since, unless the House of Representatives be
really and truly a representation of popular views
and feelings, its legislation will be partial and
unsatisfactory; while it is manifestly unjust for
him who has climbed the ladder to refuse to
help the one who is struggling to ascend, not
to dispossess him of his advantage, but to share it.
We hope our £lO householders--and indeed all
classes of the present electors—will do their duty
honestly and manfully in this important matter. It
is quite evident that a very general feeling of dis-
satisfaction exists at present from the large propor-
tion of even cur present liMited number of electors
who do not vote. A change is much needed—a
change in the number of electors—a change in the
manner of voting—a change in the duration of Par-
liaments. If our legislators will not give us our
demands unconditionally, let them meet us half way,
and let sincere .Reformers not be again led into the
blunder of refusing a partial measure because
it does not contain all they want. If we can-
not get the application of an educational test, and
the payment of rates and taxes as a condition for
voting, let us have a £6 franchise ; if we cannot
get triennial parliaments, let us have quinquennial;
if the ballot is still withheld from the nation, let us
at least have it tried fairly in half a dozen boroughs
that are willing to make the experiment. But our
leaders of the Liberal party will not condescend to
practical details. They talk very largely about the
rights of the people and the benefit of a comprehene
sive measure of reform, but even these theories sound
better they think on the hustings than in St.
Stephen's, and come with more fervour from the left
than from the right hand of the speaker. When
once the magic open sesame is spoken, and the
Whigs enter the doors of Downing street, Parlia-
mentary Reform and a few other loudly praised
measures are apt to depart by the window.

, The Patrie has very properly commented upon
the letter of Mr SEWARD, in which he refused
to allow money to be sent from England for the
relief of the Confederate prisoners. Apart from
the sense which pervades these remarks, it is gra-
tifying to behold so wise an appreciation of the
motives which urged those in this country to
make the offer. The days are happily nearly
past when nothing took place of an awkward or
unpleasant nature concerning France and England,
but that the rival State commented upon it in
unbecoming terms, if it did not actually seem to
rejoice in the annoyance and insult hurled at its
neighbour. Nothing is more likely to promote
an entente cordiale between the two countries
than the feeling of reciprocity which is engen•
dared by a recognition of the claims of either
community to respect and regard. The Parse
denounces in the strongest terms the conduct of
Mr SEWARD, and very truly observes that hi■
letter is a "masterpiece of buffoonery." It is in.
deed impossible not to notice the peculiar absur-
dities of the communication when they are
pointed out here in a brisk and spirited style:
Especial comment is placed on the passage in which
Mr. SEWARD refers to the motives which induce
him to refuse the proposal, and, indeed, they, are
groundless, and unstable even for American
assurance to dwell upon. It is said that the money
offered constitutes no large portion of the profits
derived from the insurgents by the exchange of
"arms and ammunition of war for the coveted pro-
duction of immoral and enervating slave labour."
On this the Patrie very properly affirms that the
Washington Government is inconsistent in its
actions and words. The sums found on board the
Florida that they did not scruple to receive pro-
ceeded also from " immoral and enervating slave!.
labour." Certainly the bluster of Yankee impetu.
osity has no chance against the keen and polished
criticiim of French wit and humour. It is quite
rafresh7.ng to notice how completely the writer of
this diatribe has set down the assurance and imper-
tinence of the American Secretary at War, end ex-
posed the fallacy of his argument and nothing-
ness of his reasons. It will be a great vexation,
even for the arrogance of Mr. SEWARD and his
friends to see how completely their transparent
devices have been seen through, and how powerless
are their empty threats and bombastic declarations
to impress and influence those who cAu see through
them and despise them, But, says he Patrie, in