The Sun.
London, England, 1867-04-02 00:00:00

LONDON, 7UESDAY, APRIL 2, 1867.

Ministers were again assailed right and left last
night on the subject of reform, Mr. GLADSTONE
as usual interfering very unnecessarily in the mat-
ter. He asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer
whether it was the intention of Government to
make any alteration in the bill before inviting I►he
House to consider it in committee. Mr. DISRAELI
replied that he would to-night put on the paper a
" notice" that, in committee of the whole House on
the Representation of the People Bill, he will move
clause seven—that is the clause which proposes to
give a second vote—in respect of which he will act
according to the statement of the other even-
ing. As to the other points of controversy,
he stated that the House in Committee would be
able to find the best solution for them, and the
Ministers would enter into that Committee with
the " most anxious desire in co-operation with the
House to bring the subject of Parliamentary Re-
form to a speedy and satisfactory conclusion."
This intimation of the intentions of the Ministers
was received with loud cheers. It may be ob-
served, en passant, that through the whole of the
dreary work the Ministers have had to undertake in
introducing a Reform Bill to the House they
have been met with a very willing spirit on
the part of the whole House. It is this support or
sympathy which has carried them on amidst many
drawbacks. The chief obstacles have been presented
by the leaders of the different sections, whose name,
indeed, is legion ; but no real issue has been taken
by a large number to any of the Government
propositions. It was this policy which saved
the Government from the onslaught which
was threatened by Mr. GLADSTONE, and gained
them the second reading without opposi-
tion. After the reply of the Chancellor of the
Exchequer to Mr. GLADSTONE, Lord CRANBORNE
thought fit to take his turn in assailing the Ministry,
and desired Lord STANLEY to be so kind as to in-
form him what were the provisions of the bill by
which the Government would stand or fall, as the
noble lord had stated on a previous night that they
would introduce a bill by which they would stand or
fall. To this extraordinary request Lord STAN-
LEY made a very proper answer. He said
it was rather matter for argument and dis-
cussion than for a question, and when the de
bate on the subject was resumed he should
be quite ready to answer any observations his noble
friend liked to make. We consider that the course
adopted by Lord CRANBORNE is a very undignified
one, and the respect which he gained by his con-
sistency in leaving the Cabinet when he differed
from the propositions of the Bill on Reform will be
forfeited if he enact the part of the " candid friend,"
a role in which he seems anxious to shine. We
think that common courtesy might induce him
to keep silent, and if he can say nothing
in favour of those he was so intimately
associated with a short time ago, he had
better leave it for those who are their avowed op-
ponents to make insinuations as to their sincerity,
and lay ingenious pitfalls on their pathway. It
remains to be seen whether Mr. GLADSTONE will be
satisfied with the reply he received last night, or
whether he will conjure up another phantom of his
imagination to prevent him from giving a❑
acquiescence to the ➢linisterial plans. Every
one knows that in Committee is the best
time and place for making what alterations
may be necessary; and it is the fear of its

being too conducive to that end, not the dread of
its failing to accomplish it, that has made certain
parties so very anxious about the matter. Their
wish has been father to the thought, so the sequel
will prove most assuredly.
The momentous interview with Mr. GLADSTONE
on Saturday does not seem to have smoothed the
ruffled temper of the Reformers a l'outrance, for
Mr. BEALES' remarks last night in Trafalgar-square
were not very calm or peaceful in their style or
character. On the contrary, another proof was fur-
nished, if indeed one were wanting, of the difficulty,
if not the impossibility, of perfect agreement being
come to by those who set out in so imperious a
manner to lay down the law to others. Not con-
tent with the intricate nature of the question before
him, Mr. BEALES had enough and to spare of his
eloquence to touch upon other matters, and accord-
ingly proceeded to denounce the upper classes,
even going so far as to find fault with
the Shropshire magistrates for their decision
about Mr. EYRE. When some of his hearers ven-
tured to remind him that he was wandering from the
question, he retorted with great indignation, and
declared that it was the question, " for it was the
question of the rights of the people against the base
aristocratical oppressors, and it should be the ques-
tion if the whole of the Reform League had to be
made into a Jamaica Committee." We think that
the rights of the people are never in more danger
than when those who presume to be the exponents
of their opinions while they only express their
individual prejudices, set up as their defenders and
friends. When Mr. BEALES goes to such unwar-
rantable lengths as to tell the House of Lords
that the Bill now before Parliament shall be altered
to suit their views, or that the agitation of the
past shall be as nothing to the agitation of the
future, he shows how totally unfit his judgment
is to give an opinion at all; and we are puzzled to
decide whether we should pity his intense folly or
condemn his great presumption ; but in any case
he had better descend from the pedestal where he
figures with so little credit to himself or profit to
others.

The discipline of the British army became again
last night the subject of an animated discussion in
the House of COMIIIOIII3. The great loint at ism