The Sun.
London, England, 1865-09-22 00:00:00

tion and excitement, but principally, as we hope,
because he feels it would be inconvenient to enter
at once into any agitation for the extension of
the franchise. Political friends, and political
opponents would alike regret to hear that Mr.
Bright was physically unequal to undertake a
mission that would be to him a labour of love.
But while to a certaint extent we agree with Mr.
Bright as to the importunity of forcing the Reform
question, we cannot think that he has at all honestly
explained the reasons which have led him to form
the opinion he avows. Mr. Bright says he is not
anxious that this question should be dealt with
during the official life of the present Prime Minister.
Lord Palmerston, he says, is the only man connected
with the Liberal party who is at once both able and
willing to betray the cause of Reform. Mr. Bright
assumes that one sentence from the lips of the Pre-
mier would have passed the Reform Bill of 1860,
and that sentence he refused to utter. " His col-
leagues preferred their places to their honour as
public men, and they consented to the greatest poli-
tical fraud of our times rather than leave the Trea-
sury bench for a season." Now, in passing, we
must be permitted to remark that this sweeping
attack, including as it does every member of the
Administration, from Lord Russell to Mr. Milner
Gibson, should be made, if male at all, in the House
of Commons, and, as may be reasonably desired, in
the presence of the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
But we are entirely unable to believe that Mr.
Bright is serious in making such a charge. At all
events, there can hardly be another man in England
who would venture to accuse Mr. Gladstone, we will
say, of having forfeited his public honour, and,
merely to retain a seat on the Treasury bench, of
having consented to a great political fraud. If the
statement were in any sense true, the House of
Commons that gave its confidence to the Govern-
ment of Lord Palmerston would not deserve the con-
fidence of the country. For our own part, too, we very
much doubt if even the weight of Lord Palmerston's
influence would have persuaded Parliament to pass a
measure which nobody, except Mr. Bright and his im-
mediate followers, cared for. But, be that as it may,
we are quite certain it was no part of the duty
of the Prime Minister to exercise any personal
authority he possessed to control or coerce the
representation of public opinion in the House of
Commons. Further, it is not difficult to under-
stand the objections which Mr. Bright entertains to
pressing the Reform question. The " Advanced Re-
formers," as they are called, seem to be half afraid
that the Government will ask Parliament to con-
sider the expediency of amending the representative
system. We ventured to state some short time since
that whenever the present Administration brought
in another 'Reform Bill, it would be carried, and we
say now that we are by no means sure that it is de-
sirable to consult Mr. Bright's convenience. To
speak plainly, we are inclined to think that the
sooner the subject is examined the better. It will
take some time to collect and analyse the informa-
tion which is required to frame a measure for ex-
tending the franchise so as to admit many persons
who it may be assumed are capable of appreciating
electoral obligations without disturbing the consti-
tutional balance of Parliamentary power ; and look-
ing at the general unanimity which exists in point
of principle, it might be advisable to pass a Reform
Bill through its first and second stages in the House
of Commons and see what could be made of it in
committee. This, of course, is what Mr. Bright
most particularly objects to. He is sensible that
Lord Palmerston's Government could settle the ques-
tion. He is aware that it might be settled by com-
bining the " lateral" and the " vertical" theories in
a practical scheme. He knows that he and his po-
litical friends stand well nigh alone in the way of
an arrangement. Moreover, now that the Conser-
vatives cannot hope to embarrass the Government
on the Reform question, they may be willing to assist
in disposing of it. Mr. Bright perceives all this, and,
wisely in his sense, he calls to his followers to halt.
Some of them do not appear to comprehend the com-
mand ; still, no doubt, it will be obeyed. But what
course her Majesty's Ministers and the House of
Commons may see fit to pursue is, we con-
ceive, altogether another matter. We cannot
discover that there is, or that it is probable
there will be hereafter, any necessity whatever
for agitating this question. Nor, on the
other hand, do we take it that the principle involved
in an extension of the franchise is contested. It is
true that there is no intelligible claim to beconsi-
dered, and that therefore any measure extending the
franchise would be, so to speak, gratuitous, but under
the actual circumstances we are not convinced that
it would be judicious to wait for a formal, or possibly
a clamorous, demand. Mr. Bright's suggestion is in
itself significant. The real difficulty is one that will
not be abated by time. Ten years hence, as now, the
question would have to be resolved by a process
which may hardly be described as argumentative.
Put shortly, we have to ascertain whether the fran-
chise may or may not be extended on the basis of
the subsisting constitutional equilibrium: The expe-
diency of its extension may be said to be conceded
on the condition which the word implies. We
have not to determine if it would be expedient to
change our form of government. There can he no
argument on such abstract points. What we have to
require is—how, if at all, the franchise may be safely
and equitably extended ; and that is a question which
admits of a certain and conclusive answer. The
Government of Lord Palmerston will act upon its
proper responsibility, and the decision will rest, not
with Mr. Bright, but with the House of Commons
and the country.