The Sun.
London, England, 1867-03-21 00:00:00

BENSON'S WATCHES AND CLOCKS.—
By special appointment to
H.R.H. THE PRINCE OF WALES.
Prize Medal, London, Class 33 ; Dublin, Class 10.
WATCHES CHRONOMETERS, KEYLESS, REPEATERS,
CHRONOGRAPHS, &C.
CLOCKS—Fon. DINING AND DRAWING ROOMS, CARRIAGES:
CHURCHES, &C.
JEWELLERY—SPECIALITIES IN MONOGRAMS, CRYSTALS,
DIAMONDS, AND FINE GOLD.
PLATE, AND WORKS OF ART Ix BRONZE, BY LEADING
ARTISTS.
PRICES AND DESCRIPTIONS, SEE ILLUSTRATED PAMPHLET,
POST FREE.

Watches and Clocks sent to an parts of the world.
J. W. BENSON, 25, OLD BOND STREET.
Steam Factory and City Show Rooms,
58 AND 60, LUDGATE-BILL.
Paris Exhibition, 1867, English Section, Class 23.

HIGH WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE.
Taus DAY.—Morning, 2h. 40th.—Afternoon, 2.i. 58:n.
12J-Alonatow.-Morning, 3h. 15m.—Afternoon, 3h. 35m.

-153
oftsi • ,
wrig g
a • SUIT.

LONDON, 7HURSDAY,_MARCH 21, 1867.

The meeting at Mr. GLADSTONE'S, which takes
place to-day, will, in all probability, settle the course
which the Opposition will take respecting the Go-
vernment measure of Reform. As yet they arc not
committed to any precise form of action, but we can-
not deny that the speech which Mr. GLADSTONE
delivered the other night was very ominous. Not
his speech alone, but his general tone and bearing'
seemed to herald the approach of bitter and un-
compromising hostility to the Ministerial mea-

sure. This was the more dangerous, because
his words were not uttered hastily, and
he did not take a cursory view of the matter,

so we could not put down his eagerness to condemn
to any mistaken notion he had imbibed and ex-
pressed on the spur of the moment ; on the con-
trary, his language was premeditated, and his lan-
guage could in no way be considered an extempore
reply to the speech of the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer, for all who commented upon it styled it a
prepared one. What are we to infer from this ?
Is there to be another party struggle, another
of those combinations, coalitions, or confede-

rations, such as have twice before driven

Lord DERBY from office at the time when
his Government was winning golden opinions

from the country, and scattering to the winds the

absurd notion that the Conservatives were the

enemies of all progress, and could never be of any

use as statesmen ? This may not be the case, bu

all we can say is that it looks very like it, and we
hope that the house and the country will be on the
alert, and watch how and in what manner the new

measure of Reform is treated. Mr. GLADSTONE is

a master of words, and can always make anything

appear as he likes the way he puts it, but it wilire-
quire more dexterity than he possesses to show
us why it is politic and patriotic to do this session

- -
what it was most unlawful to do the last one. We

all remember his virtuous indignation, and his

fiery declamation about the opposition he and his

friends met with in the task of introducing their

Reform Bill ; and now, from all we can gather, he
seems contemplating how to go still further, and
take more comprehensive steps to impede the course,

if not to stop altogether the progress, of the present
scheme submitted to the House. The bill of last

year was allowed to go into committee, but if either
party carry out their supposed intentions the bill
of the present year will not reach that enviable
goal.

Is it too late to hope that the Opposition will re

consider their ways, and try to follow a more
patriotic course? We really believe that a great many
members, who blindly follow their leader, would
take quite a different way of thinking if they paused
to reflect upon the consequences of their actions.
How will it appear to the country at large if
they again witness the spectacle of a wasted
session? if they see anew the cause of Re-
form at a standstill, and are told to wait
for a more convenient season ? 'Will not the general
verdict be against them, and will it not be said,with
truth, that through party prejudices and mean
jealousies a chance has been thrown away and a
good opportunity lost? What has been the conse-
quence of the bitter hostility which was shown by
the Liberal leaders to the Conservative Reform
measure of 1859 ? Has it not more than verified
all that was predicted by impartial observers and
far-sighted lookers-on? Nothing has been done to
settle the matter, though it was attempted to be dis-
posed of several times, and the best proof of
the unfair treatment which it met with may be
found in the fact that, since that time, it has be-
come the fashion to praise the provisions of a mea-
sure they denounced in toto. If, after the lapse of
eight years, we are to have a repetition of such a
policy, it is, indeed, much to be regretted, and
nothing can possibly excuse those who commit
themselves to such a course.
We may well ask what it is that offends these
opponents of the Ministerial scheme so much ? Is it
that the bill is too good for them ? Does it go too
far in the right direction, or what is it they cavil at?
For the sake of consistency they can hardly say it
is not sufficiently liberal, when it goes much further
than the Liberal scheme of last year. At any rate,
we would warn Mr. GLADSTONE and his immediate
followers that they are playing a dangerous game,
and one in which to win will be the worst that can
befall them. The loss of their opponents will not
be their own gain, but the blow will rebound on
themselves, and they will bear the consequences
of the ill-advised opposition themselves. Be-
fore the excitement of a great debate
comes on it will be well for people to
collect themselves a little, and to look the future
in the face. The present Government have come
forward with no niggard hand ; they offer Reform
iu no stinted and no sparing fashion. Are they to
be badgered and baited? is their attempt to settle
the question to be frustrated, and the year to be
wasted ? For what ? To please the vain desires of
disappointed statesmen, to satisfy the morbid jealousy
of those who have had their opportunity and fallen
short of success ? The answer to these queries can
hardly be in favour of the souse which is presaged
of the chief members of the Opposition, but we do
not believe that the fate of Reform is in their hands.
We hope that the House will refuse to sanction their
desire of obstructing the scheme now proposed, and
if it fail in this, its manifest duty, an appeal to the
judgment of the country will show them their
mistake.

The attention of the House of Commons was
yesterday given to the consideration of Church
Rates, and no less than three bills were on the
paper—Mr. HARDCASTLE'S for Total Abolition,
Mr. NEWDEGATE'S Commutation Bill, and Mr.
HUBBARD'S Regulation Bill. The second reading
of the Total Abolition Bill was carried by a ma-
jority of 76, but the discussion which took place
was not at all an animated one. Mr. WALPOLE'S
definition of the Government policy was the
most important feature in the debate. The
right hon. gentleman explained that they were
ready to keep to the compromise which they
had proposed in 1857 —namely, to exempt
Llie Dissenters after the manner proposed in
Mr, HuBBARD's Bill and in other ways, but that