The Sun.
London, England, 1870-05-31 00:00:00

LONDON, TUESDAY, _MAY 31, 1870. ,

Again, the wonder is as to who may be the Leader
of her JWAJEBTVI3 Opposition. People are once more
asking themselves as to whether the Conservative
party has any Leader at all. The Tong• Chieftain
confronting Earl GRANVILLE in the House of Lords
Vas yesterday no doubt Lord CAIRNS, is to-day no
joubt the Duke of Mamoru). The Tory Chieftain
confronting Mr. COLADSTONE in the House of Com-
mons is still, of course, the right hon. gentleman
the member for Buckinghamshire. But—the
Leader of the Opposition, as a whole—who may-
be be ? " That is the question" over which all the
more inquiring spirits in Clubland are just now, with
a renewed relish, marvelling to one another in be-
wildered amazement. Why—it may be asked—these
revivified doubts and uncertainties ? Well, the
reason is obvious enough, to even the most careless
observer, on glancing through the chief monthly
organ of Conservatism in the United Kingdom—an
organ hitherto most loyal in its allegiance to
Mr. DISRAELI, but which has now thrown

off, in his regard, the merest semblance of
consideration—scattering the last rags of its
hitherto merely affected respect for him, for his abi-
lities, or for his position, far and wide, north, south,
east and west, to all 'the winds of heaven. The
closing article in the current number of Blackwood
recalls to one's mind inevitably the closing article a
year or two since in the then current number of the
Quarterly. The authorship of the latter, it may be
remembered, was instantly recognised by poli-
tical experts—perhaps, because of its dis-
tinctive lack of " finish"--as another viru-
lent emanation from the spleen of that right
good hater (of one man, at any rate) the Marquis of
SALISBURY. As to the authorship of Maga's unmiti-
gated and most uncompromising diatribe on Lothair
—well, in regard to that, it may be said at once that
the peculiarities of the style are not by any means so
clearly marked or so readily traceable. One inciden-
tal touck there is by which the writer of the review
in question might, perchance, be identified—
if the clue thus afforded were but keenly
and perseveringly followed up. It occurs where
he is referring superciliously to the rivalry
of the social parasites who are contending
for the possession of supreme influence over the all
but fabulous fortunes of LOTIIAIR, as being, " though
more decorous, hardly more respectable, and much
less amusing than that of a crowd of Moors whom we
once saw in Tangiers, tearing each other's beards and
pulling off each other's turbans, in a mad struggle
for a fourpenny piece which an English stranger
[the Ex-Premier's Reviewer in Blackwood ?] had
dropped from a balcony." The import-
ance and significance of the whole onslaught,
however, must be defined as consisting
in this, that one of the Conservative organs hitherto
most loyal in its support of Mr. DISRAELI, suddenly,
unhesitatingly, and absolutely, throws off its al-
legiance to him altogether. The Quarterly did
some time ago. Blackwood has now followed
suit. It only remains for the Standard to cover
the Leader of Conservatism with ridicule as un-
compromiqug—to show that the Member for Bucks
is regarded by the principal organs of the par y he has
so long led in the House of Commons, and thrice to
power(thelasttime under his ownPremiership)is hence-
forth under a political taboo, in the cold shade of the
aristocracy." Realising that much, however, one
asks, again, in the interrogative phrase familiarised to
us by the title of Mr. COBDEN'S last brochure, " It hat
Next, and Next?" It seems—this last and not 16,81