The Sun.
London, England, 1860-04-24 00:00:00

It is said that the bill pleases no one—that

has no title to the name of a Reform Bill—that it
omits what real reformers most desire—and grants,
in boroughs, a franchise at least 40s. lower than
Tories like. Well, all this may be true, and yet
be no reason why the bill should not be passed.
We assuredly cannot allow that it deserves the title
of a Reform Bill; but take it for what it is—it
offers something—somethingin the direction of Re-
form—something important, otherwise the pledged
opponents of Reform would not make such wry
faces at it. We cannot see, therefore, the common
sense or consistency of professed Reformers in any
way obstructing the bill. Hence we are gratified
to observe that Mr. MassEY has been compelled to
withdraw his motion, assigning as the reason that
he had not in his simplicity supposed its success
could be regarded by the Government as fatal to the
bill. Mr. MASSEY may also have an eye to a meet-
ing convened at Salford, to which he must have
rendered some account not perhaps very pleasant to
give.

We cannot see on what pretext the House should
waste longer the country's time over the second
reading when it has been agreed that there is to be
no division. If the principle of franchise exten-
sion in counties and boroughs is not to be opposed,
why not hasten into committee and discuss details
there. There will, deubtless, be quite enough found
to occupy the time of the House in committee in dis-
cussing whether we shall have a £6 or £8 franchise,
whether any " fancy franchises" are to be added—
[to the lodgers franchise that expression can hardly
be applied, and we expect neither side will object]—
whether the rate-paying clauses shall stand,
whether constituencies shall have the option of
the Ballot, and whether many a bormigh shall
stand in the schedule which will de-
prive it of one member. Singularly enough
it does appear that the test of population which Lord
JOHN has taken as the reason for partial disfran-
chisement does leave the Whigs many more borough
members than they would retain by the test of the
number of electors. The latter seems so much
the more natural, so obviously in favour of giving
most numbers where there was most intelligence,
that it appears unaccountable how a Whig lord
could prefer number of persons merely, to num-
ber of persons competent to elect under his own
franchises, unless it
.had appeared that the,Whig
boroughs would he the greater losers by the more
rational process. We must hear the other side,
however.

We join heartily in Lord PALMERSTON'S wish
that Thursday night should bring this unmeaning
and tedious debate to a close. It will be a bore to
us all if protracted further, and the parties who do
it will be regarded by the public as factious parti-
sans. And we gather frotn Mr. DisnAELl's re-
marks that, while wishing to preserve the course
open for his followers, he would himself prefer to
get to real work—to get into committee.

The conference of ministers of religion yesterday,
'at the Whittington Club, on the Ballot, was a good
idea. They were even more appropriately invite d
to consider this subject than on a former occasion
to give their experience and thoughts on the Corr-
laws. It was a difficult thing for persons who had
not studied the subject, which the majority of minis-
ters had probably not done, to say how much of