The Sun.
London, England, 1869-06-10 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

The Times ,is puzzled to know where the chief speakers
at the Willis's Rooms meeting got their facts, though it
allows them some method in their logic. Lord Harrowby
declared his strong conviction that the majority of the
people of England was not properly represented by the
House of Commons, and that the people were taken by
surprise at the last election. Peers who entertain these
beliefs are justified in voting against the Lill ;
but what can induce a man to believe such con-
clusions, except a foregone resolution to believe them?
Can the men who opposed the principle of the bill last
year now come forward and say that they neglected to use
their opportunities during the months of summer and
autumn, and the people were taken by surprise? Lord
Ifa,rrowby's belief is explicable only by reference to the
mysterious power of the will in inducing us to hold con-
eluiions of fact in the teeth of all evidence to the contrary.
To the same influence must be attributed the declaration
of Lord John Manners, that the mind and heart of the
nation are with the Opposition in resisting the Irish
Church Bill ; and the statement of the Duke 0
Abercorn, that if the House of Lords rejected
the Irish Church Bill their action would meet with
the national approval, as expressing the real and matured
wish of the country. It seems to us—we do not wish to
say anything unnecessarily offensive—that people who
can believe such things can believe anything they have a
desire to believe. But the nation cannot be arrested in
its course by these delusions. If the holders of them are
insufficient in number to obstruct the policy of the
country, they may be allowed to grow out of them in
peace. If, on the contrary, they are numerous enough
to be able to check for a determinate season the operation
of the national will, it will be necessary that the power of
the nation shall be immediately evoked to override, by the
methods indicated by corresponding precedents, the oppo-
sition of an infatuated minority to the consummation of
the national policy,
In spite of the warlike gathering at Willis's Rooms,
the 7'eleuraph still refuses to believe that the majority of
the Conservative party in the House of Peers can delibe-
rately persist in so mad a course. It cannot suppose the
Tory noblemen of England to be so blind to the interests of
their own order—not to speak of the interest of the Irish
Church. If the Duke of Rutland and the Duke of Abercorn
were as powerful as they are Vehement, they would be
the Robespierres of the English Peerage. But there is
no sufficient reason to believe that the suicidal advice
will be followed ; and indeed every day is strengthening
the number of those Tory Peers who say, " Pass the bill,
and then amend it in committee." Moreover, a second
doubt has arisen—the really grave question whether, if the
Opposition majority be narrowed to insignificant dimen-
sions, it would not be the sounder policy, even for the "No
Surrender " force, to avoid an untoward display of its
diminished ranks. Under these circumstances, the Tele-
graph asks if it is not justified in the expectation which it
has always maintained—that Time will fight on the side
of Reason, that wisdom will finally prevail, and that the
House of Lords, after mature consideration, will allow the
bill to go into committee ?

The Post, in referring to the catastrophe of the Duke of
Newcastle, asks if it is not almost inconceivable that these
things should be done, not once, not twice, but again and
again and again, and that even bitter personal experience
has no deterrent effect, and that no amount of burning,
no repetition of it, imparts any dread of the fire to the
child of the Betting Ring. It is true that dukes and mar-
quises and earls are not the only men who gamble. The
Stock Exchange does it every day and all day, so do
many so-called great merchants, so do the boys in the street
who play pitch and toss and worry the police on Sun-
days ; but, barring the last, who are homeless, hopeless
vagabonds, it is the business of the Stock Exchange
men and the merchants, and although they often do
that business recklessly, and even dishonestly, still
it is their business by which they live, and there
are no particular considerations arising from position and
higher duties which make their speculations ordinarily a
%, scandal. A plunging duke who puts himself upon a
level with Mr. Padwick or a professional racing-man in
the Ring must be a scandal some day or other. There is
no reason why a nobleman should not race ; there is no
reason why he should not support the Turf. He may do
both, as many have done—as Lord Derby, Lord Exeter,
Lord Glasgow, Lord Palmerston, Lord George Bentinck,
the Duke of Portland, General Peel have done—with
advantage to the country and with honour to themselves ;
but these men never touched the pitch of the Turf and
they have never been defiled. Had the Duke of New-
castle been content to take to heart the lesson that the
Earl of Lincoln, one would have thought, could have
taught him, he might have been in position, character,
Ind usefulness as those noblemen and gentlemen have been
e.nd are.

The Standard concurs with the Duke of Argyll in
thinking it an evil at the present moment to submit the
constitution of the house of Lords to the conside-
ration of the other House by sending down the
Life Peerages Bill. It thinks, however, that the tone in
which the noble duke himself has seen fit to discuss the
subject is a greater evil still. Most heartily does it applaud
Lord Salisbury's manly repudiation of the overstrained
humility which thl Duke of Argyll displayed. It is not
proper that at such a time as this the House of Lords
should make " an unrestricted profession of subservience
to another branch of the Legislature." It is improper for
m )re reasons than one ; but, amongst others, because it is
not true that the House of Lords is subordinate to the
Commons. It may be subordinate to the nation, as Lord
Salisbury frankly declared ; but the House of Commons is
sometimes a very different thing from the nation, and
nothing is more important, at a time when the action of
the House of Lords is likely to give rise to great excite-
ment, than a clear comprehension of this difference.
The House of Commons is certainly the mouthpiece
of the nation, and it may be hoped that as a general
rule the voice of the House of Commons is that
of the nation ; but at any time the House is liable
to fall away from the principles which animate the people,
to get out of tune with the country, and when in this
condition it wculd be a misfortune indeed for us all if the
House of Lords were unable to act with independence.
That House would hardly acquire a representative cha-
racter by such additions to its ranks as are contemplated
by Lord Russell's bill, and constituted as it is of men,
almost all of whom have grown used to the responsibilities
of power amongst their own tenantry, and to the transac-
tion of public business upon their estates, besides being
permeated through and through with the highest culture
of the age, they may, perhaps, dispense with the neces-
sity of being representative of anything more than those
elements in the nation which they are fortunate enough to
represent by the will of Providence—its territorial wealth
and its intellectual and moral culture.

The Daily News directs attention to the result of the elec-
tion petitions, and says that at the present moment no
fewer than six boroughs in England and Ireland are par-
tially, or entirely, deprived of parliamentary representa-
tion, and eight seats in the House of Commons, some of
them for cities of no mean importance, are vacant, and
will probably continue so during this session. They in-
clude some of the mostnotorious offenders of past elections,
viz.:—Beverley, (2), Bridgwater (2), Norwich (1), Dublin
(1), Cashel and Sligo. With the exception of the two large
cities, which are only partially disfranchised, and
which we may anticipate, from their having
fairly elected one representative, will be spared
the extreme penalty of the law, it is impossible
to doubt what the fate of these boroughs will be.
It is not merely that they have been proved guilty upon
evidence admitted to be imperfect, but their previous
history and notorious fame render the issue of an inquiry
into their general political conduct much more certain
than a trial before an election judge can ever be. Public
opinion is, moreover, vividly alive to the necessity of
cutting at the root of electoral corruption ; and in the
instances of Lancaster and Great Yarmouth the House
of Commons shewed its distrust of any punish-
ment short of total extinction, when corrupt practices are
thoroughly ingrained in the political system of a borough.
It is evident that the present system has a far better
chance of maintaining its ground if grievous blots such as
these grossly corrupt boroughs are removed, and their
representative privileges are conferred upon the rising
towns which were somewhat unjustly excluded from the
settlement of the Reform Bill. Whether, therefore, from
a Conservative or reforming point of view, the issue of
these commissions seems equally important ; and while we
confidently hope that the House will re-enact the severe,
though just, sentence of the late Parliament, we trust that
they will seek by a wise distribution of these forfeited
privileges to redeem from some of its blemishes the imper-
fect settlement of last year.
The Times is glad to find from the reports of the recent
meeting that the agitation against the liquor traffic is
taking a more moderate course, and thinks that a
conference, if sufficiently representative, might be
a very useful preliminary to legislation on this
subject. It ought not, however, to be a mere
expression of opinion with a view to more
effective combination. Its principal value would be found
in the contributions of experience it might offer us.
The conference just concluded was not all that could be
wished in this respect. It is very easy to obtain theories
on this subject, but very hard to get at facts. One cannot
but receive, for instance, with some hesitation the sweep-
ing assertions of the clergy and some other temperance
advocates respecting the extent to which the evils of the
working class may be traced to drink. It is possible, no
doubt, to improve the present liquor laws, but it
is equally certain the real remedy for drunkenness
must be found in the gra,lual improvement of the lower
classes themselves. Unless this he done, it will Le hypos.
sib!e by any laws to keep them from the means of intoxi-
cation, and if it be dune a great niai,y restrictions now
proposed will be needless. The j'i,,,e..y thinls that the
supervision 3f public-houses is very properly entrusted to
those who have to administer the law. The magistrates act
upon distinct grounds, which the people can appreciate, and
since offences arising from intoxication are brought before
them, they have the best means of knowing wh ere and when
the danger exists. If, on the contrary, an elected body of rate-
payers were entrusted with a censorship to be exercised
according to certain suppositions of what is good for the
parish, their control might easily assume the character of
a social tyranny. In a word, the only principle on which,
in a free country, this traffic can be dealt with is that of
leaving it as free as is possible without danger. The
opposite principle is that of restricting it as far as is
possible without provoking a reaction. This is the spirit
in which the subject is approached by most Of the so-called ;
" Temperance" advocates, but it can never be accepted by
Parliament. i