The Sun.
London, England, 1865-07-14 00:00:00

LONDON, FRIDAY, JULY 1.1, 1865.

-•- -

Mr. DISRAELI'S speech at Buckinghamshire is
always one of the noticeable events at elecHon time.
There is none of the clamour of opposition or the
excitement of controversy, but a fair opportunity
of discussing events and speculating on policy.
On this occasion the right hon. gentleman had
much to say, because six years have elapsed since
he last addressed the electors of Buckinghamshire.
These have been eventful years in the history of
the country, and afford ample opportunity for re-
flection and comment. Of course Parliamentary
Reform occupied a prominent place in this address,
and Mr. DISRAELI had good cause to remark on
the fatal mistake which the Liberals had made in
rejecting the measure proposed by Lord DERBY'S
Government. In thwarting their opponents they
defeated their own plans, and sent promises to the
winds. It was understood that the measure should
have a fair and candid reception, considering the
peculiar circumstances in which Lord DERBY was
placed, none of his opponents in public life coming
forward to serve the Crown and country, and Re-
form being promised. Instead of this, as Mr. Dis-
RAELI observed, "it got no reception whatever ; it
was not allowed to go into committee." Such a
proceeding was unworthy of the- representatives of
the country, and, like all mean and selfish acts, it
brought no real gain to the cause, only discredit to
the schemers. Now that time has cooled down the
asperities of the time, the general feeling of the
country is not so averse to the principle upon which
that Bill was founded as some captious individuals
made out at the period of its introduction. Certainly
the Conservatives have the advantage of being able to
refer to their measure as a practical effort, on their
part, to improve the representation of the country,
while their opponents can only indulge in generali-
ties, and take refuge in abusing what others did,
and what they did not or could not do themselves.
It must be remembered also that loud and long
were the exultations that arose when the majority
sealed the fate of the Ministers and their measure,
yet, judging by the test of time, which has most
Cause t 6 be ashamed—the Liberal or Conservative ?
Mr. DisaAELI had no occasion to dread facing his
constituents ; but discretion is the better part of
valour, and doubtless that is why the prime mover
in the affair has taken refuge in a place where he is
sheltered from the storms of fate, and not subjected
to the impertinent remarks of scrutinising electors
with long memories and inconvenient ideas of jus-
tice and fair-play. Mr. DISRAELI very truly said
that every one ought to have definite opinions on
the subject of the " distribution of political power,
which is concerned in any measure of Pariamentary
Reform." This is exactly what it is, and it is not
fitting that so much political capital should be
made out of what is, in truth, a national question
of importance. Mr. DISRAELI spoke very fairly
concerning the amount of credit due to Ministers
in conducing to the general welfare of the country,
but he also satirised with no less force the absurd
lengths to which some went in this matter. In
drawing the requisite line of discrimination the
right hon. gentleman said, " I don't believe the
good harvest we enjoy has been produced by any
Cabinet Council whatever ; I don't think the gold
discoveries nor the wonderful construction of rail-
roads which now interlace the country are due to
Downing:stre3t, nor that those enterprises have
been carried on by the capital and energy of the
Government."

There are also noticeable drawbacks to observe
in the midst of our so-called universal prosperity,
and these were appropriately mentioned in this
speech. Concerning commercial prosperity there
bate been several failureg of late, which prove that